<\^\Ns.. 


%B00^ 


I*      SEP  '>7  1911      * 


Divisioa  135^80 
Section     .  '    «2)  c.  2. 


, 


^"•^  (♦     SEP  27  191 


INSPIRATION 


OF 


THE   SCRIPTURES 


BY   THE 

Rev.  FRANCIS  L.  PATTON,  D.D. 


PHILADELPHIA : 
PRESBYTERIAN  BOARD  OF  PUBLICATION, 

No.  13 34  CHESTNUT  STREET. 


Fntered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1869,  by 

THE   TRUSTEES   OF   THE 

PRESBYTERIAN  BOARD  OF  PUBLICATION, 

In   the  Clerks   Office   of  the   District  Court  of  the   Uniterl    States   for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Pennsylvania. 


Westcott  a  Thomson, 
Stereotypers,  Philada. 


PREFACE 


It  is  the  writer's  hope  that  this  attempt 
to  indicate  the  steps  by  which  we  are  led  to 
the  sure  position  that  the  Scriptures  are  an 
infallible  guide,  may  aid  the  faith  of  some 
who  belong  to  that  increasing  class  of  men 
who  are  disposed  to  speak  with  hesitancy 
concerning  the  divine  authorship  of  the 
Bible. 

Nyack  on  the  Hudson,  May  19,  1869. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I. 
The  Scriptures  are  Trustworthy. 

PASt 

Introductory — Divine  Authority  of  the  Bible  an  Important  Ques- 
tion at  the  Present  Time — Bible  a  Series  of  Literary  Doc- 
uments— Their  Historical  Credibility — Authorship  of  the 
Pentateuch — Profane  History  Confirmatory  of  Scripture— 
Rawlinson  Quoted — False  Theories  concerning  the  Person 
of  Christ  Refuted  by  Establishing  the  Historic  Credibility 
of  the  Gospels — Christianity  does  not  depend  on  the  Doc- 
trine of  Inspiration — The  Argument  a  fortiori 9 

CHAPTER  II. 

The  Bible  Contains  the  Word  of  God. 

The  Scriptures  Speak  for  themselves — No  Fallacy  in  Arguing 
from  their  Credibility  to  their  Inspiration — Supernatural 
Element  in  Scripture:  (1.)  Miracles;  (2.)  Recital  of  Divine 
Communications;  (3.)  Predictions :  these  not  Written  after 
the  Events  Occurred ;  not  Analogous  to  Heathen  Prognos- 
tications; not  Instances  of  Farsighted  Sagacity,  but  Divine 


CONTENTS. 

PASS 

Utterances — hence  their  Evidential  Valuer  (4.)  Doctrines 
which  must  have  been  Revealed,  as  we  know  (a)  from  their 
Inherent  Excellence,  (6)  their  Adaptation  to  Human  Wants, 
(c)  the  Mysteriousness  of  Some,  {d)  the  Apparent  Irrecon- 
cilability of  Others— Bible  Contains  the  Word  of  God 24 


CHAPTER  III. 

The  Whole  Bible  is  God's  Message. 

Difference  between  a  True  and  an  Official  Account — Bible  is  an 
Authoritative  Expression  of  God's  Will — This  shown  (1) 
by  the  Official  Rank  of  the  Writers;  (2.)  The  Bible  is  the 
only  Account  of  the  Way  of  Salvation  ;  (3.)  It  is  Pervaded 
by  one  Purpose;  (4.)  Relation  in  which  the  Historical  Por- 
tions stand  to  rest  of  Scripture;  (5.)  Direct  Testimony  of 
Bible 41 


CHAPTER  IV. 

Divine  Agency  Employed  in  the  Composition  of 
Scripture. 

Is  the  Bible  a  Human  or  Divine  Account  of  Supernatural  Reve- 
lations?—The  fact  that  the  Bible  is  God's  Message  raises  a 
Presumption  in  Favor  of  its  Infallibility — This  Presump- 
tion sustained  by  Several  Considerations:  (1.)  Extended 
Account  of  Divine  Communications  ;  (2.)  Marvellous  Accu- 
racy of  Scripture ;  (3.)  Motives  ascribed  to  Men  and  Rea- 
sons assigned  for  Divine  Acts  by  the  Writers  of  Scripture ; 
(4.)  Reticence  of  the  Writers  and  their  Wisdom  in  Selec- 
tion of  Facts;  (5.)  Relations  subsisting  between  the  Sev- 
eral Books  of  the  New  Testament 53 


CONTENTS.  7 

CHAPTEK  V. 

Plenary  Inspiration. 

PAQK 

Do  Scriptures  teacli  Plenary  or  Partial  Inspiration  ? — Plenary 
Inspiration  of  Old  Testament  proved:  (1.)  Nan.es  applied 
to  Old  Testament  by  Writers  of  the  New;  (2.)  Deference 
paid  to  Old  Testament;  (3.)  Its  Infallibility  asserted  by 
the  Saviour;  (4.)  Verbal  References  to  Old  Testament;  (6.) 
Direct  Assertions  of  Divine  Authorship. — Arguments  for 
Inspiration  of  New  Testament 72 


CHAPTER  VI. 
Objections  Considered. 

Spirit  of  Controversy  at  the  Present  Day  Rationalistic — Objec- 
tions to  Plenary  Inspiration :  Obj.  1.  Revelation  said  to  be 
Impossible — Objection  rests  on  False  Philosophy;  Obj.  2. 
Bible  said  to  Contradict  Science — Scripture,  though  not 
Technical,  teaches  no  Error;  Obj.  3.  Bible  said  to  Contra- 
dict Itself — Conflicting  Passages  examined;  Obj.  4.  Un- 
important Passages;  Obj.  5  based  on  1  Cor.  chap.  vii. — Lee 
quoted — Proof  demanded  for  Theory  of  Partial  Inspira- 
tion— The  Verifying  Faculty — Office  of  Reason  in  Deter- 
mining what  is  a  Revelation 93 


CHAPTER  VII. 

Explication  of  the  Doctrine. 

(1.)  Inspiration  covers  only  the  Original  MSS. — Importance  of 
this  Remark — Have  we  a  Correct  Text  ?^-Professor  Stuart 
quoted — Difference  between  an  Inspired  and  Uninspired 
Original.     (2.)  No  Inspiration  claimed  for  Writers  of  Scrip- 


CONTENTS. 

PAQS 

ture  Outside  of  their  OflBcial  Work — Infallibility  as  Authors 
did  not  make  them  Faultless  as  Men.  (3.)  Agency  of 
Spirit  in  making  Sacred  Writers  Infallible  not  equivalent 
to  his  Sanctifying  Grace — Confusion  arising  out  of  apply- 
ing same  name  to  Both — Mistake  of  Maurice.  (4.)  Inspi- 
ration, though  Verbal,  is  not  Mechanical — Dr.  Bannerman 
Quoted  and  Reviewed.  (5.)  There  is  a  DiflFerence  Be- 
tween Revelation  and  Inspiration — Does  Inspiration  imply 
Revelation  ? — Controversy  between  Dr.  Lee  and  Dr.  Ban- 
nerman alluded  to — Revelation  Defined.  (6.)  There  is  a 
Human  and  t  Divine  Element  in  Scripture 112 


THE 

INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 


T 


CHAPTER    I. 

THE    SCRIPTURES   ARE   TRUSTWORTHY. 

HE  Bible  is  the  sole  warrant  for  the  existence 
of  the  Christian  society.  The  facts  on  which 
the  Christian  system  is  based,  and  the  doctrines 
which  constitute  that  system,  are  authoritatively 
recorded  nowhere  else. 

The  members  of  this  society  agree  in  ascribing 
divine  honours  to  Jesus.  They  trust  him  as  their 
Saviour.  They  observe  religiously  the  day  which 
commemorates  his  resurrection.  They  recognize 
obligations  which  do  not  fall  within  the  circle  of 
duty  described  by  human  ethics.  They  foster  hopes 
which  can  be  realized  only  in  a  future  world. 

If  the  Bible  is  not  true,  they  are  entertaining  be- 
liefs which  have  not  a  shadow  of  support — are 
forming  plans  in  which  they  must  meet  with  bitter 


10        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

disappointment.  The  Christian  is  resting  the  for- 
tunes .of  Iiis  soul  on  the  authority  of  the  book  which 
he  calls  the  Bible.  He  is  contented  to  settle  the 
question  of  his  destiny  by  complying  with  the 
directions  which  are  offered  him  in  its  pages. 

It  cannot,  therefore,  be  a  matter  of  mere  literary 
curiosity  to  inquire  into  the  reasons  for  receiving 
this  book.  The  thinking  Christian  must  feel  a  de- 
sire to  know  why  he  is  required  to  take  it  as  his 
rule  of  faith. 

Nor  will  it  do  to  say  that  the  question  concern- 
ing the  divine  authority  of  the  Bible  has  been  set- 
tled, and  there  is  no  need  of  bringing  it  up  for  fresh 
discussion.  It  is  a  subject  of  vital  interest  at  the 
present  day.  Opposition  to  the  doctrine  of  the  in- 
fallibility of  the  Scriptures  comes  from  a  quarter 
which  makes  it  more  injurious  in  its  effects.  The 
spirit  of  Rationalism  has  invaded  the  Church,  and 
among  professing  Christians,  and  even  Christian 
ministers,  there  are  only  too  many  who  adopt  loose 
views  on  this  fundamental  question,  and  give  utter- 
ance to  sentiments  which  are  seriously  damaging  to 
the  faith  of  God's  people. 

If,  as  it  is  claimed,  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God, 
and  if  the  writers  in  the  words  they  used  acted 
under  the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  is  fair  to 


THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.         H 

,suppose  that  tlie  argiiraent  can  be  presented  in  a 
way  which  will  satisfy  the  minds  of  those  who  are 
inquiring  on  the  subject.  If  the  doctrine  of  inspi- 
ration is  one  which  claims  our  faith,  there  must  be 
evidence  for  it. 

I  shall  endeavour  in  the  following  pages  to  indi= 
cate  the  steps  by  which  we  are  led  to  a  definite 
statement  concerning  the  authorship  of  the  Bible. 
The  discussion  will  take  the  shape  of  an  inquiry 
rather  than  a  defence.  I  shall  approach  the  sub- 
ject not  as  the  advocate  of  any  particular  theory 
of  inspiration,  but  as  one  desirous  of  learning  all 
that  the  Bible  can  tell  me  concerning  the  agency 
employed  in  its  composition.  The  conclusions 
which  are  reached  will  be  the  result  of  an  inductive 
investigation. 

The  Bible  comes  into  the  hands  of  the  student 
as  a  series  of  literary  documents.  It  would  be  pre- 
mature at  this  stage  of  our  inquiries  to  attach  much 
importance  to  the  claim  which  they  make  of  being 
a  revelation  from  God.  The  question  of  their  his- 
toric credibility  must  first  be  settled  according  to 
the  rules  of  historical  criticism.  It  is  fair  for  the 
inquirer  to  ask  whether  these  documents  are  reli- 
able. Can  we  trust  them  as  the  vehicles  of  histori- 
cal information?     Is  the  Pentateuch,  for  example, 


12         ^NSPIRATTON   OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

the  product  iou  of  its  reputed  author,  or  is  it  a 
forgery  which  was  palmed  upon  the  Hebrew  people? 
These  are  questions  of  vital  importance.  The  dis- 
cussion of  them  belongs  to  the  department  of  the- 
ology known  as  Introduction.  The  reader  must 
refer  to  tlie  works  of  such  writers  as  Home,  Hav- 
ernick,  Jahn,  Rawlinson,  etc.,  if  he  wishes  to  see 
how  the  arguments  of  those  who  assail  the  credi- 
bility of  the  Scriptures  have  been  met,  and  how 
completely  the  Bible  has  been  vindicated. 

Little  more  is  possible  here  than  the  statement 
that  the  books  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments 
have  been  subjected  to  the  most  thorough  critical 
handling,  and  that  their  credibility  as  historic  doc- 
uments has  been  placed  beyond  dispute.  Better 
evidence  of  their  authenticity  we  could  not  have 
than  is  furnished  in  the  fact  that  they  have  passed 
safely  through  the  ordeal  of  German  criticism. 

No  objection  has  been  raised  against  the  genuine- 
ness and  authenticity  of  the  Pentateuch  sufficiently 
grave  to  outweigh  the  testimony  of  the  entire  Jew- 
ish nation.  The  study  of  the  Old  Testament  will 
show  that  the  Jews  as  early  as  the  reign  of  David 
were  confident  that  Moses  wrote  the  first  five  books 
of  the  Scriptures.  So  deeply  was  this  conviction 
rooted  in  the  national  mind  that  political  differ- 


THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.         13 

ences,  even  wlien  they  culminated  in  schisms,  were 
not  strong  enough  to  induce  either  party  to  cast 
discredit  on  the  books  which  bear  the  name  of  their 
lawgiver.  Though  the  Pentateuch  was  the  statute- 
book  of  Judah,  the  ten  tribes  showed  no  disposi- 
tion to  set  aside  its  authority,  as  we  learn  from  the 
fact  that  the  Samaritans  received  it  alone  of  all  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures,  because  it  was  the  book 
of  the  Law  given  by  Moses.  It  has,  indeed,  been 
alleged  that  writing  was  not  known  in  the  time  of 
Moses,  or,  if  known,  that  writing  materials  were 
not  at  hand  adapted  for  so  large  a  work  under  the 
circumstances  of  a  wilderness  journey.  This  objec- 
tion, however,  has  been  set  aside  by  recent  discov- 
eries of  Babylonian  bricks  and  Egyptian  papyruses, 
which  are  estimated  to  be  coeval  with  Moses.  "  It 
has  been  said  that  if  Moses  had  written  the  book, 
he  would  not  have  spoken  of  himself  in  the  third 
person,  and  that  he  would  not  have  applied  to 
himself  terms  of  praise  and  expressions  of  honour."* 
To  which  it  is  enough  to  reply  by  saying  that  par- 
allel passages  may  be  cited  from  the  writings  of 
Homer  and  Chaucer,  of  Csesar  and  Xenophon,  and 
even  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  These  are  considera- 
tions which  abundantly  confirm  the  testimony  of 
*  Rawlinson's  Historical  Evidences,  p  5'i. 


14        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

the  Hebrew  people.  That  a  deliberate  forgery 
could  have  won  the  confidence  of  the  nation  so  as 
to  have  been  regarded  by  them  in  the  light  of  a 
sacred  trust,  embodying  their  history,  their  geneal- 
ogies, their  laws  and  their  religious  institutions,  is 
a  supposition  which  cannot  be  entertained.  Yet 
the  book  must  have  been  written  by  Moses,  or  be 
the  work  of  an  impostor.  That  Moses  was  the 
author  of  the  books  attributed  to  him  is  evident 
from  the  fact  that  they  were  written  by  one  who 
was  an  eye-witness  of  most  of  the  events  recorded. 
The  careful  attention  which  the  writer  bestows 
upon  the  record  of  places,  battles,  marches,  etc.,  the 
minute  circumstances  which  he  weaves  into  the  nar- 
rative, corroborate  the  belief  that  he  was  a  partici- 
pator in  the  transactions,  and  that  he  wrote  from 
personal  knowledge. 

The  books  were  evidently  written  while  the 
events  were  in  progress.  There  is  no  systematic 
division  of  the  material  into  subjects,  as  would  be 
the  case  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  with  a  historian 
writing  from  reflection  or  crystallizing  floating  tra- 
ditions. Historical  facts,  laws,  admonitions  follow 
each  other  without  any  other  relation  than  that  of 
chronological  sequence.  They  were  written  in  the 
form  of  '\  journal,  and  by  one  whc*   knew  whereof 


THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.  16 

lie  affirmed.  The  use  of  archaic  forms  of  expression 
and  of  words  of  Egyptian  origin,  the  allusions  to 
the  government  and  social  life  of  the  Egyptians — 
particularly  the  mention  of  their  practice  of  em- 
balming the  dead — prove  that  the  writer  must  have 
lived  in  a  time  as  early  as  Moses,  and  must  have 
enjoyed  a  familiarity  with  foreign  customs  which  is 
best  explained  by  the  circumstances  attending  the 
education  and  early  life  of  the  Jewish  lawgiver. 
Finally,  the  distinct  declarations  that  God  com- 
manded Moses  to  write  the  discomfiture  of  Amalek 
in  a  book — that  Moses  wrote  all  the  words  of  the 
Law,  and  took  the  book  of  the  covenant  and  read  it 
in  the  audience  of  the  people — that  he  made  an  end 
of  writing  the  words  of  the  Law  in  a  book  till  they 
were  finished,  and  bade  the  Levites  who  bare  the 
ark  of  the  covenant  take  that  book  of  the  Law  and 
put  it  in  the  side  of  the  ark  of  the  covenant  of  the 
Lord,  that  it  might  be  there  for  a  witness  against 
the  people — leave  no  room  for  doubt  that  Moses 
was  the  author  of  the  books  which  bear  his 
name.  This,  it  is  conceded  by  our  opponents,  is 
enough  to  settle  the  veracity  of  the  narrative. 
"It  would  most  unquestionably,"  says  Strauss, 
*'  be  an  argument  of  decisive  weight  in  favour 
of   the  credibility    of    the   biblical    history   could 


16        lySPIBATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

it  indeed  be  shown  that  it  was  written  by  eye- 
witnesses."* 

The  historical  books  which  follow,  though  of 
uncertain  authorship  are  nevertheless,  authentic,  as 
both  internal  and  external  evidence  abundantly 
testify.  They  have  the  "  force  of  state  papers,  be- 
ing the  authoritative  public  documents,  preserved 
among  the  national  archives  of  the  Jews,  so  long 
as  they  were  a  nation  ;  and  ever  since  cherished  by 
the  scattered  fragments  of  the  race  as  among  the 
most  precious  of  their  early  records."t 

We  are,  however,  more  than  compensated  for 
their  anonymous  character  by  the  abundant  cor- 
roborative testimony  which  these  books  receive  from 
other  portions  of  Scripture  and  from  profane  sources. 
Kings  and  Chronicles  are  independent  records,  and, 
so  far  as  they  cover  common  ground,  serve  to  sub- 
stantiate each  other.  The  historical  books  of  tlie 
Old  Testament  receive  an  endorsement  in  the  writ- 
ings of  the  prophets  analogous  to  that  which  the 
book  of  Acts  receives  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  The 
reader  may  verify  this  by  comparing  the  })rophecies 
of  Isaiah  with  the  second  book  of  Kings — for  ex- 
ample, the  accounts  of  the  sickness  of  Hezekiah 

*  Quoted  by  Rawlinson,  Hist'l.  Ev.  p.  67. 
t  Rawlinson,  p.  80. 


'  THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.  17 

and  the  death  of  Sennacherib  (Isa.  xxxvii.  8 ;  2 
Kings  xix.  20).  Recent  antiquarian  and  historical 
studies  have  thrown  light  upon  the  Scriptures.  The 
•^  giant  cities  of  Bashan  '^  of  which  Moses  tells  us, 
no  longer  aiford  opportunity  for  a  jest  at  the  ex- 
pense of  Scripture.  They  still  exist,  the  silent 
but  enduring  monuments  to  the  veracity  of  the  He- 
brew historian.*  Scientific  inquiries  confirm  the 
Bible  accounts  of  the  creation,  the  origin  of  man,  the 
unity  of  the  race  and  the  ethnic  relations  of  man- 
kind. ^'  The  Toldoth  Beni  Noah,'''  says  Rawlinson, 
"  has  extorted  the  admiration  of  modern  ethnologists, 
who  continually  find  in  it  anticipations  of  their 
greatest  discoveries."  Archaeological  researches  in 
Nineveh  and  Babylon  illustrate  the  state  of  art  in 
the  age  of  Solomon  among  the  nations  contiguous 
to  the  Jews,  and  among  other  things  remove  the 

*  "  At  least  a  thousand  square  miles  of  Og's  ancient  kingdom 
were  spread  out  before  me.  There  was  the  country  whose  giant 
(Eephaim,  Gen.  xiv.)  inhabitants  the  Eastern  kings  smote  before 
they  descended  into  the  plains  of  Sodom,  There  were  those 
threescore  great  cities  of  Argob  whose  walls  and  gates  and 
brazen  bars  were  noted  with  surprise  by  Moses  and  the  Israel- 
.  ites,  and  whose  Cyclopean  architecture  and  massive  stone  gates 
even  now  fill  the  Western  traveller  with  amazement,  and  give 
his  simplest  descriptions  much  of  the  charm  and  strangeness 
of  Romance." — Porter's  Giant  Cities  of  Bashan,  p.  30. 
2 


18        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

difficulty  which  the  modern  reader  experiences  it 
the  Scripture  account  of  the  lavish  use  of  gold  for 
purposes  of  ornamentation,  by  showing  that  this 
was  in  accordance  with  the  customs  of  the  age.* 

The  Scripture  accounts  of  the  Assyrian  mon- 
archs  who  played  an  important  part  in  the  history 
of  the  Jews  have  in  great  measure  been  confirmed 
by  Assyrian  records.  Of  this  a  good  illustration 
is  the  account  of  the  invasion  of  Sennacherib, 
which  we  find  minutely  recorded  in  his  annals  as 
well  as  in  the  Bible.  Assyrian  monuments  have 
come  to  the  aid  of  the  Christian  student,  and  have 
reconciled  the  seeming  contradiction  between  Daniel 
and  Berosus,  by  giving  a  royal  title  to  Belshazzar.f 

Rawlinson  thus  sums  up  the  result  of  the  in- 

*  Rawlinson's  Historical  Evidences,  p.  71. 

t  The  account  of  the  capture  of  Babylon  by  the  Persians 
used  to  be  cited  as  one  of  the  cases  where  Scripture  contradicts 
profane  history.  According  to  Daniel,  the  king  Belshazzar  Avas 
killed  at  the  taking  of  Babylon.  According  to  Berosus,  the 
king  Nabonadius  was  absent  from  the  city  at  the  time  of  its 
capture,  and  was  afterward  treated  with  clemency.  A  double 
contradiction  !  It  was  only  in  1854  that  vSir  H.  Rawlinson 
solved  this  difficulty  by  the  discovery  that  Nabonadius  had  a 
son  named  Bil-sha-ruzer  (Belshazzar*,  who  had  been  associated 
with  him  in  the  government,  and  who  shared  the  royal  title. 
Bee  Rawlin.^^on,  p.  139,  and  note  p.  353. 


THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.  19 

vestigations  which  concern  the  authenticity  of  the 
Old  Testament :  ^^  It  has,  I  believe,  been  shown,  in 
the  first  place,  that  the  sacred  narrative  itself  is  the 
production  of  eye-witnesses,  and  therefore  that  it 
is  entitled  to  the  acceptance  of  all  those  who  regard 
contemporary  testimony  as  the  main  ground  of  all 
authentic  history.    And  it  has,  secondly,  been  made 
apparent  that  all  the  evidence  which   we  possess 
from    profane   sources  of  a  really  important  and 
trustworthy  character  tends  to  confirm  the  truth 
of  the  history  delivered  to  us  in  the  sacred  volume. 
The   monumental  records  of  past  ages,  Assyrian, 
Babylonian,    Egyptian,    Persian,    Phoenician— the 
writings  of  historians  who  had  based  their  histories 
on   contemporary   annals,    as    Manetho,    Berosus, 
Dius,   Menander,   Nicolas  of  Damascus — the  de- 
scriptions given  by  eye-witnesses  of  the  Oriental 
manners   and    customs — the    proofs    obtained    by 
modern   research    of  the  condition    of  art   in  the 
time  and  country— all  combine  to  confirm,  illustrate 
and  establish  the  veracity  of  the  writers  who  have 
delivered    to   us    in    the    Pentaleuch,   in    Joshua, 
.Judges,     Samuel,    Kings   and     Chronicles,    Ezra, 
Esther  and  Nehemiah,  the  history  of  the  chosen 
people." 

The  sUidents  of  Scripture  have  been  equally  sue- 


20       INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

cessful  in  vindicating  the  historical  credibility  of 
the  several  books  of  the  New  Testament.  What 
has  been  said  will  be  sufficient  to  indicate  the  prin- 
ciples which  guide  investigation  on  this  subject. 

Before  we  prosecute  our  inquiries  farther,  let  us 
notice  the  great  advantage  we  have  already  gained. 
Take,  for  illustration,  the  case  of  the  four  evange- 
gelists.  If  it  can  be  established  that  the  Gospels 
were  written  by  those  whose  names  they  bear,  it 
will  be  impossible  to  evade  the  statements  which  we 
find  in  them.  It  will  not  do  to  resort  to  imposture 
on  the  part  of  either  Christ  or  his  apostles  in  ex- 
planation of  Christianity.  The  theory  that  the 
world  has  been  duped  and  Judaism  overthrown  by 
a  Galilean  impostor  never  had  plausibility  enough 
to  gain  credence.  The  statement  of  the  hypothesis 
that  the  disciples  renounced  their  educational  be- 
liefs, and  went  forth  to  die  in  the  attempt  to  propa- 
gate a  deception,  is  its  best  refutation. 

Equally  unsatisfactory  is  the  supposition  that  the 
men  who  for  three  years  were  the  companions  of 
Jesus  could  have  been  deceived  when  such  abun- 
dant opportunities  were  afforded  them  of  testing 
his  claim  to  divine  commission.  The  theory  of 
imposture  and  of  self-deception  have  both  been  tried 
and  found  wanting,  and  the  enemies  of  Christianity 


THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.  21 

have  att«;mpte(l  to  destroy  the  credibility  of  the 
Gospels  by  fixing  on  the  second  or  third  century  as 
the  time  of  their  composition.  But  the  legendary 
hypothesis  cannot  stand  the  test  of  historical  critic- 
ism. It  has  been  proved  by  an  array  of  patristic 
testimony  that  the  Gospels  in  their  present  form 
were  read,  quoted  and  received  as  authoritative  by 
the  Church  early  in  the  second  century.  In  other 
A^ords,  we  are  left  without  the  shadow  of  a  doubt 
that  these  writings  are  the  productions  of  their  re- 
puted authors. 

This  being  the  case,  it  follows  that  the  character 
portrayed  by  the  evangelists  is  that  of  a  real  man  ; 
that  Jesus  uttered  the  words  attributed  to  him; 
that  he  gave  signal  proofs  of  his  divinity,  and 
wrought  miracles  in  attestation  of  his  divine  com- 
mission. We  learn,  moreover,  that  the  books  of 
the  Old  Testament — held  sacred  by  the  Jews  from 
time  immemorial,  though  containing  the  record  of 
their  national  crimes — were  authoritatively  en- 
dorsed by  the  Son  of  God.  So  when  the  credibility 
of  the  book  of  Acts  is  established,  we  prove  that 
the  apostles  agreed  in  recognizing  Jesus  as  the  Mes- 
siah, and  that  they  went  forth  amid  dangers  to 
preach  the  doctrine  of  the  Resurrection  ;  nay,  that 
in  Jerusalem,  the  very  place  where  the  enmity  of 


22        JSSJ'J RATION  OF  THE   SCRIPTURES. 

the  human  heart  had  curdled  into  Pliarisaic  spite, 
they  proclaimed  that  the  '^same  Jesus,  whom  by 
wicked  hands  they  had  crucified  and  slain,  God 
had  raised  from  the  dead/' 

If  we  could  do  no  more  than  establish  the  his- 
torical credibility  of  the  Bible,  there  would  be  evi- 
dence sufficient  to  condemn  those  who  refuse  to  be- 
lieve it.  I  must  take  exception  to  the  disposition 
on  the  part  of  some  to  stake  the  fortunes  of  Chris- 
tianity on  the  doctrine  of  Inspiration.  Not  that  I 
yield  to  any  one  in  profound  conviction  of  the  truth 
and  importance  of  this  doctrine.  But  it  is  proper 
for  us  to  bear  in  mind  the  immense  argumentative 
advantage  which  Christianity  has,  aside  altogether 
from  the  inspiration  of  the  documents  on  which  it 
rests.  I  cannot  agree  with  a  recent  writer  when  he 
says :  '^  If  we  take  away  the  inspired  character  of 
the  Scripture  narrative,  we  really  shall  possess  little 
more  certainty  with  regard  to  the  facts  of  our  Lord's 
life  than  we  do  to  the  facts  of  ancient  Roman  his- 
tory. That  this  is  not  too  strong  a  statement  of  the 
case  is  shown  in  the  results  of  denying  the  inspired 
authority  of  the  evangelists,  as  illustrated  in  ro- 
mances which  Strauss  and  Renan  have  proposed  to 
substitute  for  the  sacred  history."* 

*  Garbett,  God's  Word  Written,  p.  330. 


THE  SCRIPTURES  TRUSTWORTHY.         2e3 

This  passage,  though  occurring  in  a  very  able 
treatise  on  the  subject  of  Inspiration,  1  cannot  but 
look  upon  as  too  great  a  concession  to  the  cause  ot 
Rationalism.  The  Christian  apologist  cannot  meet 
infidel  objections  by  assuming  the  doctrine  of  In- 
spiration. While  the  question  of  historical  credi- 
bility is  at  issue,  the  battle  must  be  fought  on  the 
ground  of  historical  evidence.  The  romances  of 
Strauss  and  Renan  are  triumphantly  answered  by 
proving  the  early  origin  of  the  Gospels.  The  Chris- 
tian minister  and  apologist  must  never  deprive  him- 
self of  the  argument  a  fortiori  which  is  furnished 
him  in  the  study  of  the  Scriptures. 

If  on  simple  historical  testimony  it  can  be 
proved  that  Jesus  wrought  miracles,  uttered  pro- 
phecies and  proclaimed  his  divinity — if  it  can  be 
shown  that  he  was  crucified  to  redeem  sinners,  that 
he  rose  again  from  the  dead,  and  that  he  made  the 
destiny  of  men  to  hinge  on  their  acceptance  of 
him  as  their  Saviour — then,  whether  the  records 
which  contain  these  truths  be  inspired  or  not,  woe 
into  him  who  "neglects  so  great  salvation !'' 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    BIBLE    CONTAINS    THE    WORD    OF    GOD. 

HAYING  reached  the  position  that  the  Scrip- 
tures are  reliable,  we  are  prepared  to  admit 
tlieir  testimony  concerning  themselves.  They  are 
competent  witnesses  concerning  their  own  origin ; 
and  there  is  no  fallacy  involved  in  arguing  from 
the  credibility  of  the  Bible  to  its  inspiration.  An 
objection  is  sometimes  put  in  this  form:  ^'You 
must  believe  tliat  the  Bible  is  true  before  you  can 
accept  its  testimony  concerning  its  inspiration  ;  and 
you  must  know  that  it  is  inspired  before  you  can 
vely  upon  its  statements.  A  circle  evidently !" 
The  difficulty  is  easily  removed.  Ordinary  his- 
torical evidence  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  us  with  re- 
gard to  the  truthfulness  of  statements  which  we 
find  in  the  w^'itings  of  Tacitus,  Caesar,  Grote,  Gib- 
bon and  Macaulay.  AVe  do  not  insist  upon  in- 
spiration on  the  part  of  these  authors  as  a  guaran- 
tee of  their  credibility.  Their  books  may  contain 
errors.     Instances  of  false  reasoning,  hasty  gener- 

24 


THEY  CONTAIN  THE    WORD   OF  GOD.      25 

alization,  incorrect  judgment  may  occur  in  their 
pages,  but  of  their  general  fruthfalness  we  have  no 
doubt.  Historical  criticism  places  the  Bible  on  a 
level  with  the  most  reliable  human  histories.  If, 
on  after  study,  we  find  that  the  style  in  which  the 
Scriptures  are  written,  the  information  they  con- 
tain, the  harmony  which  pervades  them  indicate 
that  supernatural  agency  was  employed  in  their 
composition ;  if,  moreover,  the  writers  claim  to 
have  been  guided  by  divine  wisdom ;  if,  by  their 
references  to  the  several  books  of  the  Bible,  they 
indicate  their  conviction  that  the  words  of  Scrip- 
ture are  the  words  of  God, — then  we  are  able  to 
draw  an  inference  far  in  advance  of  the  general 
credibility  of  the  Bible.  We  prove  that,  owing  to 
the  divine  agency  employed  in  its  composition,  it 
must  be  free  from  all  mistakes  incident  to  merely 
human  authorship — that  it  can  contain  no  errors 
in  judgment,  no  inaccuracies  in  doctrinal  statement. 
In  short,  from  its  credibility  as  a  literary  docu- 
ment we  advance  to  its  infallibility  as  God's  mes- 
sage to  men  for  the  guidance  of  life. 
,  At  the  threshold  of  our  investigations  into  the 
contents  of  Scripture  we  are  brought  face  to  face 
with  the  supernatural.  The  Bible  contains  the 
account  of  God's  miraculous  presence  in  the  affairs 


2G        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

of  human  history;  and  this  account  is  so  closely 
woven  into  the  texture  of  Scripture  that  its  truth- 
fulness cannot  be  invalidated  without  overthrow- 
ing all  historical  testimony.  So  that,  whether  the 
Bible  is  a  supernatural  production  or  not,  it  cer- 
tainly does  constitute  in  its  main  features  a  record 
of  divine  communications. 

To  illustrate  this  idea  is  the  object  of  the  present 
chapter. 

(1.)  The  Bible  contains  the  account  of  miracles. 

We  cannot  deal  with  the  miracles  of  Scripture 
as  with  the  myths  of  ancient  Greece  and  Rome, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  instead  of  being  the 
legends  of  a  pre-historic  age,  they  are  matters  of 
sober,  well-authenticated  fact,  and  constitute  a 
very  important  part  of  the  historic  life  of  the 
Hebrew  people.  To  show  this,  it  is  enough  to 
mention  the  miracles  which  attested  the  divine 
commission  of  Moses  and  of  his  successors.  Be- 
ginning with  the  plagues,  we  have  the  destruction 
of  the  first-born  in  Egypt,  the  passage  of  the  Red 
Sea,  the  quails,  the  manna,  the  leprosy  of  Miriam, 
the  judgment  of  Korah,  Dathan  and  Abiram,  the 
blossoming  of  Aaron's  rod,  the  smiting  of  the  rock 
at  Meribah,  the  brazen  serpent. 

Then,  the  passage  of  the  Jordan,  the  destruction 


THEY  CONTAIN  THE    WORB   OF    GOD.      27 

of  Jericho,  the  defeat  of  the  Gibeonites.  liater 
still,  the  accounts  of  Elijah  fed  by  ravens,  the 
widow's  cruse,  Elijah's  translation,  the  Shunamite's 
child,  the  cure  of  Naaman.  And  finally  we  have 
the  well-authenticated  accounts  of  the  miracles  of 
our  Lord  and  his  apostles. 

We  cannot  separate  miracles  from  their  historical 
associations.  The  Bible  presents  the  supernatural 
in  the  sphere  of  historical  relations,  and  subjects  it 
to  the  test  of  historical  criticism.  And  the  study 
of  the  Scriptures  impresses  upon  us  the  conviction 
that  the  history  which  it  embodies  is  a  miraculous 
history — a  history  which  has  been  shaped  by  divine 
agency. 

(2.)  Many  passages  in  the  Bible  claim  to  be  the 
recital  of  divine  communications. 

It  is  not  strange  that  men  whose  ideas  of  history 
are  cast  in  the  mould  of  a  naturalistic  philosophy 
should  try  to  break  down  the  credibility  of  the 
Bible ;  for  it  contains  a  history  in  which  the  visi- 
ble appearance  of  the  divine  Being  and  the  audible 
utterance  of  divine  communications  are  cardinal 
facts.  Every  institution  which  is  characteristic  of 
the  Jewish  people  is  wedded  to  the  supernatural. 
Take,  for  example,  the  account  of  God's  appearance 
to  Moses  when    he   kept   the  flocks   of  Jethro  in 


28        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

Horeb,  of  Moses'  appointment  to  the  leadership  of 
Israel,  of  the  institution  of  the  Passover,  of  the  de- 
liverance of  the  Law  in  Sinai.  These  are  salient 
l)oints  in  Hebrew  history,  but  they  are  linked  with 
the  utterance  of  divine  communications.  The  Le- 
vitical  code  is  the  axis  on  which  the  civil,  social 
and  religious  life  of  the  Jews  revolve,  but  it  too 
came  from  the  lips  of  Jehovah.  The  minute  in- 
structions concerning  the  ark,  the  altar,  the  taber- 
nacJe,  the  sacred  vestments,  the  Urim  and  Thum- 
mim,  the  anointing  oil,  the  consecration  of  the 
priests,  were  oral  communications  addressed  to 
Moses.  The  laws  concerning  the  sin,  meat,  burnt 
and  trespass-offerings,  the  feast  of  tabernacles  and 
the  year  of  jubilee,  find  their  explanation  in  the 
opening  verse  of  the  twentieth  chapter  of  Exodus : 
"  And  God  spake  all  these  words.'' 

The  successor  of  Moses  conducted  his  adminis- 
tration under  the  oral  instructions  of  Jehovah. 
He  crossed  the  Jordan,  besieged  Jericho,  took  Ai, 
divided  the  land,  appointed  cities  of  refuge,  in  ac- 
cordance with  divine  direction. 

The  solemn  preface  with  which  the  prophet 
always  announced  his  message  proves  that  he  acted 
as  the  mouthpiece  of  God.  Thus  we  read  :  "The 
word  that  Isaiah  the  son  of  Amoz  saw  concerning 


THEY  CONTAIN  THE   WORD   OF  GOD.      29 

Jiidah  and  Jerusalem ;"  ''Thus  saitli  the  Lord;" 
"The  word  that  came  unto  Jeremiah  from  the  Lord, 
saying:"  "Hear  ye  the  word  which  the  Lord 
speaketh  to  you,  O  house  of  Israel;"  "And  the 
word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  me  saying,  Son  of 
man;"  "Also,  thou  son  of  man,  thus  saith  the 
Lord  God  unto  the  land  of  Israel,"  etc. 

It  is  evident  that  if  we  should  take  out  of  Scrip- 
ture all  those  portions  which  claim  to  relate  what 
God  said,  we  should  rob  the  Bible  of  a  large  part 
of  its  contents.  And  if  we  should  set  aside  all  the 
historical  facts  which  depend  upon  the  oral  utter- 
ances of  God  fo^  their  explanation,  very  little  would 
be  left  worth  calling  history  at  all. 

(3.)  The  Bible  contains  predictions^  together  with 
the  record  of  their  fulfilment. 

God  holds  the  key  which  unlocks  the  secrets  of 
the  centuries  to  come.  We  cannot  dip  into  the 
future.  The  keenest  foresight  will  not  enable  a 
man  to  write  the  history  of  the  next  year  in  ad- 
vance. The  elements  which  enter  into  the  life  of 
a  nation  are  too  numerous,  the  causes  which  operate 
on  communities  are  too  subtle,  the  motives  which 
influence  human  conduct  too  inscrutable,  for  history 
ever  to  become  a  matter  of  prevision.  The  human 
will  is  an  effectual  barrier  tc  the  ambition  of  those 


30        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

who  would  cany  scientific  induction  into  the  sphere 
of  mind  and  make  history  a  matter  of  calculation. 
Whatever  may  be  the  solution  of  the  great  question 
of  the  ages  regarding  the  will,  certain  it  is  that  so 
far  as  man  is  concerned  the  future  must  always  be 
uontingent,  since  the  human  spirit  is  either  free,  or 
the  secret  of  its  action  is  hid  with  Him  who  gave 
it  being.  Hence  the  predictive  element  of  Scrip- 
ture has  always  and  deservedly  held  a  position  of 
high  evidential  importance.  This  element  is  a 
marked  feature  of  the  Bible.  The  destruction  of 
Sennacherib,  the  death  of  Jezebel,  the  recovery  of 
Hezekiah,  the  Babylonish  captivity,  the  desola- 
tion of  Edom,  the  fall  of  Babylon,  the  humb- 
ling of  Egypt,  the  coming  of  the  Messiah,  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  are  instances  of  fulfilled 
predictions  which  confront  the  denier  of  the  su23er- 
natural. 

It  would  be  an  easy  way  of  disposing  of  these 
troublesome  facts  if  the  opponents  of  Revelation 
could  say  of  them  all,  as  of  some  they  have  the 
effrontery  to  say,  that  the  so-called  predictions  were 
not  written  till  the  corresponding  events  had  oc- 
curred. But  God  has  taken  care  tc  put  us  in  pos- 
session of  evidence  that  the  greater  portion  of  the 
prophetic  series  was  on  record  at  the  time  of  the 


THEY  CONTAIN  THE   WOBJD   OF  GOD.      31 

Babylonish  captivity,  and  that  therefore  the  predic- 
tions which  concern  Edom,  Moab,  the  Philistines, 
Egypt,  Babylon  and  the  coming  of  Christ,  antedate 
by  centuries  the  events  which  constitute  their  ac- 
complishment. 

Nor  is  the  cause  of  Rationalism  helped  by  the 
appeal  which  is  sometimes  made  to  two  or  three 
cases  of  heathen  prognostications.  The  saying  of 
Seneca,*  that  the  time  would  come  when  Shetland 
would  cease  to  be  the  boundary  of  the  known 
world,  is  adduced  sometimes  as  a  parallel  to  the 
prophecies  of  Scripture.  As  if  the  vague  guesses 
of  heathenism  were  at  all  analogous  to  the  collec- 
tion of  definite  predictions  which  we  find  in  the 
Bible !  The  reader  must  remember  that  the  con- 
trast between  Bible  predictions  and  heathen  oracles 
is  not  alone  in  the  fact  that  the  former  are  more 
discriminating  and  unambiguous,  but  also  that 
instead  of  consisting  of  sporadic  cases  of  prog- 
nostication, they  constitute  a  collective  series. 
''  The  evidence  of  prophecy/^  says  Fairbairn,  "  is 
essentially  of  a  connective  and  cumulative  charac- 
ter. It  does  not  consist  so  much  in  the  verifica- 
tions given  to  a  few  remarkable  predictions,  as  in 
the  establishment  of  an  entire  series  closely  related 

^  See  Fairbairn  on  Prophecy,  p.  -07,  American  edition. 


32        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

to  each  other,  and  forming  a  united  and  compre- 
hensive whole."  * 

Let  the  reader  study  the  series  of  prophetic  ut- 
terances concerning  the  Jewish  people  and  the 
neighbouring  nations ;  and  ask  himself  whether 
the  circumstantial  verifications  of  them  are  to  be' 
flippantly  disposed  of  as  illustrations  of  conjectures 
"  extraordinarily  felicitous." 

Turn  again  to  the  predictions  relating  to  the 
coming  of  Christ,  which  date  from  Paradise,  and 
crowd  the  pages  of  the  later  prophets.  With 
growing  distinctness  as  the  time  of  the  Advent 
ipproached  we  find  him  described.  He  was  to 
be  of  the  seed  of  Abraham,  of  the  tribe  of  Judah, 
of  the  house  of  David — was  to  be  born  of  a  virgin, 
in  the  town  of  Bethlehem.  He  was  to  combine 
the  attributes  of  God  and  man.  He  was  to  be  at 
once  a  King  and  a  servant — a  man  of  sorrows  and 
the  Prince  of  Peace.  Are  these  predictions,  which 
find  such  complete  fulfilment  in  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
to  be  explained  as  a  series  of  fortunate  conjectures  ? 
Or  if,  with  some,  we  say  that  the  prophecies 
concerning  the  Messiah  are  only  expressions 
of  the  longings  of  the  Hebrew  people  is  it  a 
matter  of  accident  that  they  took  a  shape  which 
*  Fairbairn  on  Prophecy,  p.  206,  American  edition. 


THEY  CONTAIN  THE   WORD   OF  GOD.      33 

found  such  wonderful  realization  in  the  person  of 
Jesus  ? 

Surely,   in  attempting  to  eliminate  the  super- 
natural from  Scripture  men  are  obliged  to  resort 
to  explanations  which  are  far  stranger  than  mir- 
acles, and    in    leaving  the  domain  of   faith  they 
become  the  victims  of  credulity ! 

Equally  unsuccessful,  though  in  advance  of  the 
views  just  alluded  to,  is  the  hypothesis  which  ac- 
counts for  the  predictions  of  the  Bible  by  attribut- 
ing to  the  writers  a  very  far-sighted  sagacity. 
The  advocates  of  this  view  refer  us  to  the  antici- 
pations of  scientific  discovery  in  the  Organon  of 
Bacon,  to  the  soul  of  Columbus  ^'  burdened  with  a 
material  vision,"  to  Wickliffe,  Luther  and  Knox, 
who  "  in  prophetic  vision  saw  the  great  futurity 
of  Protestantism  which  was  to  shake  the  founda- 
tion of  the  civilized  world."* 

Will  any  one  pretend  that  these  are  analogous 
to  the  predictions  of  the  Bible  ?  There  may  be 
causes  now  at  w^ork  the  development  of  which  in 
the  proximate  future  we  may  predict  with  tolerable 
accuracy.  The  tendency  of  current  events  may  in 
some  instances  be  so  obvious  that  we  can  safely 
form  a  judgment  concerning  the  issue.  But  is 
*  Quoted  by  Fairbairn,  Prophecy,  p.  217 


34       INSPIRATION  OF  THE   SCRIPTURES. 

this  equivalent  to  the  utterance  of  prc/phecy  cou- 
ceriiing  a  remote  future,  and  with  reference  to 
events  which  are  not  hinted  at  by  anything  in  the 
present  ? 

We  may  be  safe  in  predicting  in  a  general  way 
great  advance  in  scientific  knowledge  during  the 
coming  years.  "That  which  men  have  done  is  but 
earnest  of  the  things  that  they  shall  do/'  But 
what  if  the  vision  of  the  poet  shall  be  realized, 
who 

"Saw  the  heavens   filled  with    commerce,  argosies   of  magic 

sails, 
Pilots  of  the    purple   twilight,  dropping  down  with  costly 

bales ; 
Heard  the  heavens  fill  with   shouting,  and  there  rained   a 

ghastly  dew 
From    the    nations'  airy    navies    grappling   in   the    central 

blue." 

Should  we  then  number  Tennyson  among  the 
prophets,  and  put  these  lines  on  a  level  with  the 
predictions  of  Isaiah  ? 

The  prophecies  of  Scripture  cannot  be  used  as 
illustrations  of  political  sagacity  or  scientific  dis- 
cernment. They  do  not  consist  of  judgments  con- 
cerning the  issue  of  events  in  progress  at  the  time 
of  their  utterance.     They  are  distinct,  discriminat- 


THEY  COiy'TAIN  THE   WORD   OF   GOL.      35 

ing,  detailed  predictions  concerning  events  which 
could  not  have  been  suggested  by  anything  which 
addressed  itself  to  the  observation  of  the  keenest 
vision.  Only  an  eye  lit  with  heavenly  brightness 
could  see  the  shadow  of  the  doom  which  was  to 
overtake  Tyre,  "  the  crowning  city,  whose  mer- 
chants were  princes,  and  whose  traffickers  the  hon- 
ourable of  the  earth."  Only  when  the  divine  hand 
had  removed  the  veil  which  hid  the  future,  could 
the  prophet  see  the  destruction  which  in  coming 
years  was  to  fall  upon  the  proud,  brazen-gated 
Babylon. 

(4.)  Doctrines  are  taught  in  Scripture  which  must 
have  come  from  God. 

We  know  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  have 
God's  sanction.  For  what  is  Hebrew  history  but 
a  long  lesson  in  monotheism  ?  What  were  the 
bondage  in  Egypt,  the  wilderness  journey,  the 
Sinaitic  legislation,  the  Babylonish  captivity,  but 
parts  of  an  education  designed  to  drill  the  Jews  in 
the  doctrine  of  God's  unity  and  to  teach  them  the 
meaning  of  true  spiritual  worship  ?  What  was  the 
.sacrificial  system  but  a  divine  exposition  of  the 
doctrine  of  guilt?  In  like  manner  the  doctrines 
peculiar  to  or  more  fully  developed  in  the  Christian 
system  were,  as  we  learn  from   Paul,  matters  of 


36        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

direct  revelation.  The  trinity,  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  the  work  of  the  Spirit,  justification  by  faith, 
the  resurrection,  the  judgment,  eternal  retribution, 
were  all  inculcated,  at  least  germinally,  in  the  dis- 
courses of  our  Lord  himself. 

I  wish,  however,  to  draw  attention  to  the  fact 
that  these  doctrines  not  only  were,  but  must  have  been, 
divinely  revealed.  They  are  stamped  with  the 
divine  image  and  superscription.  Their  inherent 
excellence  witnesses  to  their  heavenly  origin.  The 
Bible  representation  of  God  is  unique.  Equally 
removed  from  the  superstition  which  peopled  hill 
and  dale  with  deities,  and  the  skepticisms  which 
locked  the  universe  in  the  arms  of  fate,  it  teaches 
of  one  ever-present,  overruling  Spirit.  Excluding, 
on  the  one  hand,  the  view  which  makes  God  only 
an  exaggerated  man  and  which  clothes  him  in  the 
imperfections  of  humanity,  and  on  the  other  the 
Pantheism  which  strips  him  of  his  personality,  it 
teaches  us  of  a  Person  who  is  clothed  in  infinite 
perfections — whose  attributes  of  holiness,  of  justice 
and  of  love  are  the  prototypes  of  all  that  is  noble 
in  man,  and  in  whose  image  man  was  created.  It 
reveals  to  us  a  God  at  once  a  Sovereign  and  a 
Father ;  a  God  who  satisfies  our  instincts  of  obli- 
gation and  dependence;   a  God   in  whose  nature 


THEY   CONTAIN  THE   WORD   OF   GOD.      37 

blend  the  attributes  of  justice  and  of  mercy — who 
manifests  the  one  in  his  supreme  regard  for  the 
majesty  of  law,  while  he  exhibits  the  other  in  em- 
barking the  resources  of  Omnipotence  in  the  work 
«f  man's  redemption.  The  Bible  conception  of 
God,  we  may  safely  say,  never  could  have  originated 
in  a  human  brain.  The  originality  of  Christ's 
character  has  been  made  use  of,  of  late,  as  an  argu- 
ment for  his  divinity,  and  it  is  a  strong  one.  A 
character  which  has  won  the  admiration  of  the 
world,  ideally  perfect,  though  contrary  to  all  ante- 
cedent ideals,  cannot  be  a  human  invention.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  the  code  of  Christian  ethics. 
A  system  which  commands  the  world's  homage, 
though  in  open  contradiction  to  the  world's  practice; 
which  makes  another's  righteousness,  not  our  merit, 
the  ground  of  divine  acceptance — self-sacrifice,  not 
selfishness,  the  rule  of  Christian  living;  which  pre- 
scribes love  rather  than  hate,  forgiveness  rather  than 
resentment,  endurance  rather  than  revenge;  which 
tells  us  that  humility  is  better  than  ambition,  philan- 
thropy than  conquest, — a  system  at  once  so  grand 
and  so  far  beyond  the  compass  of  heathen  thought, 
must  have  come  from  God.  The  Christian  system 
meets  the  wants  of  the  race,  and  this  corroborates 
its  claim   to  be  a  divine  revelation.     The  Bible 


38        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

brings  to  light  the  deep  things  and  the  secret  things 
of  man's  spiritual  nature.  It  is  the  interpreter  of 
the  conscience.  It  expounds  man's  sense  of  guilt, 
and  throws  light  upon  the  instinct  which  prompts 
him  to  pray  an  I  offer  sacrifice.  It  explains  his 
dissatisfaction  with  all  that  is  earthly  by  widening 
the  field  of  his  vision  and  disclosing  the  glories  of 
a  better  land.  And  while  it  affirms  the  judgments 
of  the  conscience  concerning  his  sin  and  destiny,  it 
also  gives  him  solid  ground  for  his  hopes  by  assur- 
ing him  that  the  blood  of  Jesus  has  been  spilled  in 
expiation  of  his  guilt,  and  that  the  love  of  the  tri- 
personal  God  has  been  enlisted  for  his  recovery. 

Nor  does  the  raysteriousness  of  some  of  the  doc- 
trines at  all  shake  our  faith  in  their  divinity ;  it 
rather  strengthens  it;  for  it  may  be  taken  for 
granted  that  what  has  originated  in  a  human  mind 
is  not  beyond  human  comprehension.  By  dint  of 
persevering  study,  men  are  able  to  get  to  the  bot- 
tom of  what  Plato  or  Shakespeare  has  said,  but  no 
human  mind  can  fathom  the  depths  or  explore  the 
secrets  of  the  Bible  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  the 
Incarnation.  The  fact  that  the  learning  and  indus- 
try of  nineteen  Christian  centuries  have  been  ex- 
pended on  the  investigation  of  these  doctrines  with 
out  exhausting  their  meaning  or  divesting  them  of 


THEY  CONTAIN  THE   WOED   OF   GOI).      39 

mystery,  is  very  good  reason  for  our  believing  them 
to  be  divine.  Nay,  the  very  doctrines  which  are 
sometimes  used  as  arguments  against  the  Bible  may 
be  fairly  employed  in  its  defence,  and  in  the  fact 
that  they  conflict  with  each  other  we  may  find  a  con- 
firmation of  their  claims.  Predestination  and  free 
agency  are  alike  taught  in  the  Bible.  They  per- 
vade the  sacred  volume.  They  are  both  empha- 
sized. They  are  both  insisted  on  by  the  same 
writers.  They  follow  hard  upon  each  other  in 
the  same  chapter.  And  yet  no  human  mind 
can  reduce  them' to  unity.  It  is  easy  to  construct 
a  consistent  system  on  either  doctrine  alone,  and 
systems  of  this  one-sided  kind  have  been  built. 
We  may  build  on  God's  sovereignty  as  a  founda- 
tion, and  fatalism  is  the  result.  We  may  build  on 
man's  freedom  as  a  foundation,  and  Pelagianism  is 
the  result.  The  Bible  system,  however,  is  that 
which  recognizes  both  truths,  and  concedes  their 
irreconcilability  because  they  transcend  human 
comprehension.  But  is  it  supposable  that  a  system 
which  incorporates  two  elements  so  obviously  in- 
compatible, so  far  as  our  reason  is  concerned,  could 
have  originated  with  man  ?  Would  doctrines  which 
have  tasked  the  faith  of  Christians  in  all  ages  ever 
have  suggested  themselves  to  a  human  speculator  as 


40       INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

true  ^Would  a  writer  of  Paul's  learning  and  pen 
etration  have  failed  to  see  that  these  two  ideas,  whicl 
he  insists  upon  in  his  Epistles,  are,  to  all  human 
appearance,  in  open  conflict  ?  And  could  he  ever 
have  persuaded  himself  that  they  were  true,  or  have 
spoken  so  confidently  concerning  them,  if  his  faith 
had  not  rested  on  the  authority  of  divine  revela- 
tion ?  To  the  candid  mind  there  can  be  but  one 
answer  to  these  questions.  Divine  authority  alone 
could  have  overcome  the  protest  which  reason  would 
have  raised  against  the  apparent  discrepancy  of 
these  doctrines.  We  can  account  for  their  exist- 
ence in  Scripture  only  on  the  supposition  that  they 
came  from  God,  and  that  the  discrepancies  disap- 
pear in  a  unity  which  is  above  us  and  out  of  siglit. 
We  shall  learn  by  further  inquiry  whether  the 
Bible  gives  us  a  human  version  of  divine  revela- 
tions, or  whether  the  record  itself  is  a  divine  pro- 
duction. In  the  mean  time,  let  us  mark  the  progress 
we  have  made  in  this  chapter  by  adopting  tlie  for- 
mula of  a  theory  of  partial  inspiration; — *  The 
Bible  contains  the  Word  of  God. 

*  The  distinction  between  the  Bible  and  the  Word  of  God 
was  first  brought  into  prominence  by  Tollner,  about  the  raid- 
die  of  last  century.  See  Hagenbach,  Hist.  Doctrine,.  Ameri- 
can edition,  vol.  ii.  p.  466. 


CHAPTER  III. 

^^      THE    WHOLE    BIBLE    IS    GOD'S    MESSAGE. 

WE  were  led  in  our  last  chapter  to  a  very  im- 
portant conclusion.  A  survey  of  Scripture 
teaches  us  thai  our  religion  is  throughout  a  reve- 
lation from  God.  The  object  of  our  faith  is  God 
manifest  in  the  flesh.  The  doctrines  which  con- 
stitute our  creed  came  from  God,  and  are  attested 
by  the  most  marked  manifestations  of  the  divine 
presence  and  power ;  so  that  the  Christian  has  a 
right  to  feel  the  most  unshaken  confidence  in  his 
religion.  This  conclusion  will  now  aid  us  in  es-  N 
tablishing  the  authoritative  character  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. The  next  question  of  an  inquirer  would  be, 
"  Does  the  Bible  contain  the  authoritative  and,  so  to 
speak,  the  official  account  of  God's  revelation?'' 
The  question  does  not  imply  that  any  suspicion 
exists  with  regard  to  the  truthfulness  of  the  ac- 
count. We  have  reached  the  position  which 
makes  any  such  suspicion  impossible,   not  to  say 

illogical.     ]^ut  a  true  account  is  one  thing,  and  an 

ii 


42       INSPIRATION  OF   TRE  SCRIPTURES. 

official  another.  Macaulay's  history  is  true,  but  if 
is  different  from  the  State  papers  from  which  he 
derived  his  information.  The  question  I  have 
raised  has  a  very  important  bearing  on  the  subject 
of  inspiration.  For  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the 
Bible  was  meant  to  be  the  authoritative  account  of 
a  plan  of  salvation,  the  very  strongest  presumption 
will  be  afforded  for  its  infallibility.  Did  God  in- 
tend, we  may  suppose  an  inquirer  to  ask,  that  the 
accounts  of  the  miracles,  divine  utterances,  pro- 
])hecies,  doctrines  which  we  find  in  the  Scripture 
should  be  put  on  record  for  the  use  of  coming  gen- 
erations, and  do  the  records  which  we  have  carry 
his  sanction  ?  Do  we  know  that  the  writers  of 
Scripture  were  authorized  to  write  the  books  of 
the  canon  ?  The  official  rank  of  most  of  the  writ- 
ers is  enough  to  give  the  weight  of  authority  to 
what  they  wrote.  Moses  was  the  accredited  leader 
of  God's  people;  he  wrought  miracles  in  proof 
of  his  divine  commission  ;  enjoyed  face  to  face 
interviews  with  Deity;  received  oral  instructions 
concerning  the  institutions  embodied  in  his  history. 
Do  we  need  proof  that  Moses'  writings  had  the 
divine  sanction,  when  his  whole  public  life  brought 
him  into  official  relations  with  God  ?  When  the 
prophets   uttered    their  messages  under  divine  in- 


THE   WHOLE  BIBLE  IS  GOD'S  MESSAGE.  43 

spiration,  it  can  hardly  be  said  that  their  pro- 
phecies were  less  authoritative  because  put  into 
a  written  form.  They  did  not  lose  their  divine 
sanction  by  being  put  on  record.  Nor  is  it  neces- 
sary for  us  to  have  evidence  for  the  authoritative 
character  of  the  apostolic  writings  beyond  the  com- 
mission given  to  the  apostles  to  preach,  teach,  or- 
ganize the  Church  and  administer  its  affairs.  The 
divine  sanction  which  adhered  to  their  preaching 
and  administration  may  be  fairly  taken  as  pimd 
facie  evidence  in  behalf  of  the  authority  of  their 
writings. 

Let  us  look  after  the  question  in  another  light. 
The  great  idea  of  the  Bible  is  redemption.  Every- 
thing in  Scripture  crystallizes  round  the  person  of 
Christ.  The  burden  of  the  volume  is  salvation  by 
faith.  A  gospel  for  the  world,  a  gospel  for  all 
time,  a  gospel  who«e  benefits  to  be  enjoyed  must 
be  known — this  is  the  teaching  of  Scripture.  It 
reveals  a  gospel  which  contemplates  propagation. 
The  telliny  of  it  is  not  an  accident,  and  therefore  a 
matter  unprovided  for.  It  exists  to  be  told.  It 
was  given  to  be  preached.  The  inference  is 
natural,  therefore,  that  the  gospel  to  be  world-wide 
njust  be  written. 

The  case  stands  thus.     The  Bible  either  contains 


44       INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

an  authoritative  account  of  the  Gospel,  or  we  havt 
a  religion  divinely  revealed,  with  no  divine  care 
for  its  preservation — a  religion  meant  to  be  uni- 
versal with  no  provision  for  its  perpetuation.  We 
must  receive  the  Bible  as  containing  an  official  ac- 
count of  God's  will,  or  express  our  obligation  to 
the  writers  of  Scripture  for  the  literary  impulse 
which  prompted  them  to  put  on  record  the  facts  on 
the  preservation  of  which  the  hopes  of  the  world 
depended. 

To  my  mind  one  of  the  best  evidences  that  the 
Bible  is  a  revelation  from  God  is  that  it  is  a 
revelation  of  God. 

Further.  The  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation,  as 
has  been  already  intimated,  unifies  the  Bible.  The 
sacrifice  of  Christ  is  the  key  to  the  Jewish  ritual. 
The  advent  of  the  Messiah  is  the  fulfilment  of  pro- 
phecy. The  Bible  without  Christ  is  a  riddle ;  the 
Bible  interpreted  with  Calvary  in  view  is  the  un- 
folding of  a  single  plan.  Throughout  the  volume 
the  same  "  increasing  purpose  runs.''  The  convic- 
tion grows  upon  the  mind,  with  increased  study  of 
the  Scriptures,  that  they  were  meant  to  exhibit  the 
progressive  development  of  a  scheme  of  grace  which 
culminated  in  the  gift  of  Jesus  and  the  offer  of  sal- 
vation to  all  who  bel'eve  in  his  name.     And  this 


THE  WHOLE  BIBLE  TS  GOD'S  MESSAGE.    45 

question  addresses  itself  to  our  judgment,  Is  it  pos- 
sible that  writers  who  were  separated  by  the  lapse 
of  centuries,  and  who  were  actuated  only  by  the 
ordinary  motives  which  prompt  to  literary  compo- 
sition, could  have  produced  a  series  of  books  which 
would  constitute  the  complete  and  congruous  sys- 
tem of  truth  which  we  find  in  the  Bible  ? 

But  it  may  be  said  that  some  of  the  historical 
portions  of  the  Bible  contain  information  which  was 
within  easy  reach  of  an  ordinary  historian,.  The 
books  of  Kings  and  Chronicles  and  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles,  for  instance,  might  easily  have  been  writ- 
ten by  men  who  had  access  to  the  ordinary  avenues 
of  knowledge.  It  would  be  anticipating  what  I 
shall  have  to  say  when  I  speak  more  particularly 
of  the  proofs  of  plenary  inspiration,  to  deny  this 
assertion  here.  I  shall  admit  the  propriety  of  the 
question  which  is  based  on  it.  How  do  we  know 
that  these  historical  events  of  Scripture  were  in- 
tended to  form  part  of  a  divine  message  ?  And  the 
answer  is.  Because  of  the  relations  in  which  they 
stand  to  other  portions  of  Scripture. 

It  is  a  peculiarity  of  the  Christian  religion  that 
history  is  made  the  channel  of  communicating  su- 
pernatural truth.  The  doctrines  all  have  an  histor- 
ical setting.     Prophecy  and   history  are  so  corre- 


46        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

lated  that  they  iHustrate  and  confirm  each  othei. 
The  historical  portions  of  the  Bible  are  written 
with  such  evident  reference  to  the  illustration  of  a 
single  scheme,  are  so  plainly  subordinate  to  and  in 
harmony  with  the  great  idea  of  Redemption,  that 
we  should  be  warranted  in  placing  them  on  a  level 
with  the  strictly  prophetic  or  doctrinal  books, 
though  direct  Scripture  testimony  on  the  point 
w^ere  wanting.  It  is  impossible  that  authors,  act- 
ing without  concert,  on  their  individual  responsi- 
bility, could  have  produced  a  series  of  writings  so 
wonderfully  corroborative  of  those  portions  of 
Scripture  which  are  avowedly  the  records  of  divine 
communications. 

But  the  Scriptures  themselves  are  far  from  being 
silent  on  the  question  before  us.  They  intimate 
very  clearly  that  all  the  parts  of  the  Bible  stand  on 
the  same  level  in  point  of  authority,  and  together 
constitute  a  divine  message.  There  are  passages 
which  intimate  that  portions  of  Scripture  at  least 
were  written  by  direct  command.  Thus,  concern- 
ing the  discomfiture  of  Amalek,  we  read,  "And  the 
Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Write  this  for  a  memorial  in 
a  book  and  rehearse  it  in  the  ears  of  Joshua.''  Ex. 
xvii.  14.  So  in  Numbers  xxxiii.  1,  2:  "These  are 
the  journeys  of  the  children  of  Israel  which  went 


THE  WHOLE  BIBLE  IS  GOD'S  MESSAGE.     47 

foj*th  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt  with  the  armies 
under  the  hand  of  Moses  and  Aaron.  And  Moses 
wrote  their  going  out  according  to  their  journeys, 
by  commandment  of  the  Lord."  Ex.  xxiv.  4 : 
"And  Moses  wrote  all  the  words  of  the  Lord. 
And  he  took  the  book  of  the  cove- 
nant and  read  in  the  audience  of  the  people, 
and  they  said,  All  that  the  Lord  hath  said  will  we 
do  and  be  obedient.''  Ex.  xxxiv.  27:  "And  the 
Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Write  thou  these  words,  for 
after  the  tenor  of  these  words  have  I  made  a  cov- 
enant with  thee  and  with  Israel.'' 

We  read  likewise  that  Jeremiah  was  commanded 
to  take  a  roll  and  write  in  it  the  words  which  God 
had  spoken  to  him  against  Judah  and  Jerusalem. 
Habakkuk  was  charged  to  write  the  vision  and 
make  it  plain.  The  writer  of  the  Apocalypse  dis- 
tinctly states  that  he  wrote  his  visions  by  divine 
command. 

Daniel  and  Zechariah  both  testify  that  in  their 
day  there  was  a  collection  of  sacred  writings  which 
had  claims  upon  the  faith  of  the  people  and  were 
clothed  with  divine  sanctions.  Dan.  ix.  2:  "And 
I  Daniel  understood  by  the  books  the  number  of 
the  years  when  the  word  of  the  Lord  came  to  Jere- 
miah the  prophet  that  he  would  accomplish  seventy 


48        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

years  in  the  desolations  of  Jerusalem."  Zech.  vii. 
7  :  "  Should  ye  not  hear  the  words  which  the  Lord 
hath  cried  by  the  former  prophets  when  Jerusalem 
was  inhabited  and  in  prosperity,  and  the  cities 
thereof  round  about  her,  when  men  inhabited  the 
south  and  the  plain  ?"  Verse  12 :  "  Yea,  they  made 
their  hearts  as  an  adamant  stone  lest  they  should 
hear  the  law,  and  the  words  which  the  Lord  of 
hosts  hath  sent  in  his  Spirit  by  the  former  pro- 
phets." 

The  Pentateuch  is  spoken  of  repeatedly  in  the 
Bible  as  God's  law.  Ps.  xix.  7  :  "  The  law  of  the 
Lord  is  perfect."  Ps.  cxix.  1  :  "Blessed  are  the 
undefiled  in  the  way  who  walk  in  the  law  of  the 
Lord."  Neh.  viii.  8 :  "So  they  read  in  the  book 
in  the  law  of  God  distinctly,  and  gave  the  sense,  and 
caused  them  to  understand  the  reading."  Verse 
14 :  "  And  they  found  written  in  the  law  which 
the  Lord  had  commanded  by  Moses"  (see  Lev.  xxiii. 
34,  42)  "that  the  children  of  Israel  should  dwell  in 
booths  in  the  feast  of  the  seventh  month."  Luke 
ii.  23:  "As  it  is  written  in  the  law  of  the  Lord" 
(see  Ex.  xiii.  2),  "Every  male  that  openeth  the  womb 
shall  be  called  holy  unto  the  Lord." 

It  is  a  sufficient  reason  for  holding  all  the  books 
of  the  Old  Testament  in  equal  reverence,  that  they 


THE  WHOLE  BIBLE  IS  GOD'S  MESSAGE.    49 

all  had  a  place  in  the  Canon,  and  were  held 
sacred  by  the  Jewish  nation.  They  were  all  in- 
cluded among  the  "  oracles  of  God,"  of  which  the 
Jews  were  made  the  guardians.  Rom.  iii.  1,  2. 
And  more  than  this,  the  Old  Testament  was  recog- 
nized by  our  Saviour  himself,  and  quoted  as  au- 
thoritative by  him  and  his  apostles.  They  accepted 
the  Jewish  Scriptures  as  God's  message,  and  made 
no  distinctions  of  rank  between  the  several  books. 
Under  the  name  Scripture  they  embraced  every- 
thing between  Genesis  and  Malachi.  "  Think  not, 
said  Jesus,  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law  or 
the  prophets :  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but  to 
fulfill."  Paul  gives  decided  though  incidental 
testimony  to  the  authority  of  the  historical  books 
in  Rom.  xi.  2,  where,  quoting  from  1  Kings 
xix.  14,  he  says,  "  Wot  ye  not  what  the  Scripture 
saith  of  Elias,  how  he  maketh  intercession  to  God 
against  Israel  ?"  etc. 

There  are  many  other  passages  besides  these 
which  have  been  adduced  in  which  the  Scriptures 
assert  their  authoritative  character.  Thus  our 
Baviour  said,  '^  Search  the  Scriptures,  for  in  them 
ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life,  and  they  are  they 
which  testify  of  me."  John  v.  39.  ^*  Had  ye  be- 
lieved Moses,  ye  would  have  believed  me :  for  he 


50       INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

wrote  of  me.  But  if  ye  believe  not  his  writings, 
how  shall  ye  believe  ray  words?"  John  v.  46. 
"  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets,  neither 
would  they  be  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from  the 
dead."  Luke  xvi.  31.  He  reproves  the  two  dis- 
ciples on  the  way  to  Emmaus  because  they  lacked 
faith  in  the  Scriptures :  "  O  fools,  and  slow  of 
heart,  to  believe  all  that  the  prophets  have  spoken.'' 
Luke  xxiv.  25. 

Peter  exhorted  those  to  whom  his  epistle  w^as 
addressed  to  be  "  mindful  of  the  words  which  had 
been  spoken  before  by  the  holy  prophets."  Paul 
commends  Timothy  for  his  knowledge  of  the  holy 
Scriptures,  which  were  able  to  make  him  wise  unto 
salvation,  and  which  are  profitable  for  doctrine, 
for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction  in 
righteousness,  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect, 
thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works.  2  Tim. 
iii.  15-17. 

The  same  apostle  says  to  the  Christians  at 
Rome,  "  Whatsoever  things  were  written  aforetime, 
were  written  for  our  learning,  that  we  through 
patience  and  comfort  of  the  Scrij^tures  might  have 
hope."  Rom  xv.  4.  A  passage  in  the  Second 
Epistle  of  Peter  iii.  15-16,  while  teaching  that 
the   Scriptures    are   authoritative,   and  that    it   h 


THE  WHOLE  BIBLE  IS  GOD'S  MESSAGE.     51 

dangerous   to    pervert   them,  gives   very    explicit 
testimony  to  the  equality  of  the  New  Testament 
with  the   Old:    "Even   as   our    beloved   brother 
Paul  also  according  to  the  wisdom  given  unto  him 
hath  written  unto  you,  as  also  in  all  his  epistles 
speaking    in  them  of  these  things;  in  which  are 
some   things   hard   to  be  understood,  which  they 
that  are  unlearned  and  unstable  wrest,  as  they  do 
also  the  other  Scriptures ^  to  their  own  destruction." 
Citations   like   these   might  be  multiplied,  but 
these  are  enough  for  our  purpose.     Let  us  notice 
their  bearing  on  the  argument.     The  object  of  the 
writers  in  penning  these  passages  was  not  to  estab- 
lish the  divine  authority  of  the  Old   Testament. 
These  passages  are  incidental  allusions  to  a  well-es- 
tablished fact.      When  Ezra  mentions  the  book  of 
the  Law;  when  Matthew  refers  to  the  law  of  the 
Lord ;  when  the  Saviour  refers  to  Moses  and  the 
prophets  ;  when  the  apostles,  all  through  their  writ- 
ings, show  their  reverence  for  the  Old  Testament 
.by  prefacing  their  quotations  with  the  words,  What 
saith  the  Scripture,  The  Scripture  saith.  It  is  writ- 
.  ten,  etc.,  they  were  uttering  no  strange  sentiments, 
were  broaching  no   new  doctrines.     Hence   these 
casual  references  to  the  authority  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament are  the  strongest  testimony  we  can  have, 


52        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

because  they  show  that  it  had  such  a  place  in  the 
minds  of  those  to  whom  the  New  Testament 
writers  addressed  themselves,  that  argument  was 
unnecessary. 

It  is  proper,  moreover,  to  remember  that  the 
authoritative  character  of  the  Bible  does  not  rest 
exclusively  on  specific  Scripture  proofs.  That  the 
Scriptures  were  meant  as  a  divine  message  is  suf- 
ficiently indicated  in  the  fact  that  they  contain  a 
revelation  of  supernatural  truth,  and  together  con- 
stitute an  organic  unity.  So  that  these  texts,  even 
if  they  should  seem  inadequate  to  establish  the 
proposition  which  I  have  placed  at  the  beginning 
of  this  chapter,  are  conclusive  when  considered  as 
corroborative  of  a  proposition  which  rests  on  other 
ground  as  well. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

DIVINE    AGENCY    EMPLOYED    IN    THE   COMIOSITION    OF 
SCRIPTURE. 

WE  reach  solid  ground  when  we  are  assured 
that  the  Bible  is  the  authoritative  expression 
of  God's  will.  But  we  cannot  stop  at  this  point 
in  our  investigation.  We  naturally  desire  to  know 
how  the  books  of  Scripture  were  produced. 

The  fact  that  the  Bible  is  a  divine  message  does 
not  necessarily  imply  that  it  is  a  divine  writing. 
The  supernatural  character  of  its  contents  does  not 
settle  the  question  concerning  the  agency  employed 
in  its  composition.  Our  inquiries  have  as  yet 
taught  us  nothing  on  the  subject  of  inspiration, 
God  might  have  allowed  the  prophets  to  record  the 
revelations  made  to  them,  without  exerting  any 
further  influence  on  them.  Through  the  ordinary 
•  exercise  of  memory  they  might  have  preserved, 
with  a  degree  of  accuracy,  the  substance  of  the 
supernatural  communications.  For  aught  we  have 
learned  yet,   the  historical  portions  of   the  Bible 

53 


54       INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

may  have  been  composed  under  the  general  super- 
intendence of  God,  without  any  special  exercise  of 
divine  agency  in  the  choice  of  words  or  in  the 
arrangement  of  materials.  And  if  we  were  with- 
out evidence  that  the  sacred  writers  received  divine 
assistance  in  the  composition  of  Scripture,  we 
could  not  deny  the  claims  of  the  Bible  to  be  a  di- 
vine message.  We  could  not  assert  its  infallibility, 
to  be  sure ;  we  could  not  say  that  the  message  had 
undergone  no  change  in  passing  through  a  human 
medium;  but  it  would  nevertheless  possess  sufficient 
accuracy  to  render  him  inexcusable  who  should 
refuse  to  take  it  as  the  guide  of  his  life. 

Is  the  Bible  a  human  or  a  divine  account  of 
supernatural  revelations  ?  Does  God  speak  to  us 
in  his  own  words,  or  do  the  sacred  writers  give  us 
their  version  of  what  they  have  seen  and  heard  ? 
Does  the  divine  message  come  to  us  as  the  direct 
utterance  of  God's  mind,  or  has  it  taken  the  colour- 
ing of  human  imperfections  in  passing  through  the 
channel  of  human  authorship?  Now,  the  fact 
that  the  Bible  is  God's  message  raises  the  strongest 
presumption  in  favour  of  its  infallibility.  God 
speaks  to  men  through  the  written  word.  This  is 
the  only  avenue  by  which  man  can  expect  divine 
communications  to  come.     This  volume  was  meant 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR   COMPOSITION.    55 

to  be  a  complete  and  perpetual  embodiment  of 
God's  will  in  the  matter  of  human  salvation.  It 
is  fair  for  us  to  sujipose  that  God  would  preserve 
it  from  errors  incident  to  mere  human  authorship  ? 
We  surely  have  every  reason  to  expect  that  God 
would  not  give  the  world  a  book  which  makes 
known  the  only  way  of  escape  from  divine  wrath 
without  guarding  it  against  inaccuracies  in  the 
statement  of  facts  and  mistakes  in  the  exposition 
of  doctrine.  We  may  fairly  presume  that  God 
would  not  give  us  his  revelations  at  second  hand, 
but  that  he  would  place  on  the  documents  which 
contain  it  the  stamp  of  divine  authorship. 

This  presumption  is  confirmed  by  several  con- 
siderations, aside  altogether  from  the  texts  which 
explicitly  teach  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures. 

(1.)  Extended  accounts  of  divine  communications. 

It  has  been  already  said  that  the  writers  of 
Scripture  might  have  reported  the  substance  of  the 
communications  addressed  to  them,  without  super- 
natural aid.  We  must  remember,  however,  that 
in  many  instances  the  Scriptures  purport  to  give 
us  not  the  substance,  but  a  vei'hatim  report,  of  what 
God  said.  Let  the  reader  turn,  for  example,  to 
Exodus  xxv.-xxx.  These  chapters  contain  the  oral 
instructions   addressed    to    Moses   concerning   the 


56        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

setting  up  of  the  tabernacle.  They  are  so  varied, 
so  novel,  so  disconnected,  so  minute,  that  the  most 
retentive  memory,  we  may  say  without  hesitation, 
could  not  safely  be  entrusted  with  them.  And  yet, 
fidelity  in  the  mention  of  the  smallest  details  was 
necessary  to  the  carrying  out  of  God's  will.  The 
most  trifling  thing — the  fringe  of  a  curtain,  the  col- 
our of  a  vestment,  the  knop  of  a  candlestick — if  it 
was  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  a  matter  of  di- 
vine instruction,  was  important  enough  to  be 
correctly  recorded.  The  best  explanation  of 
Moses'  fidelity  is,  that  God  kept  him  from  error  by 
aiding  in  the  composition  of  his  books. 

(2.)  Marvellous  accuracy  of  Scripture. 

The  accuracy  of  the  sacred  writers  goes  far  be- 
yond that  of  other  historians.  The  Bible  is  accu- 
rate to  a  superhuman  extent.  It  is  not  only  want- 
ing in  mistakes  sufficient  to  invalidate  its  claims  to 
veracity,  but  it  is  not  chargeable  with  any  mistakes. 
It  not  only  defies  the  industry  of  those  who  hunt 
through  its  pages  for  errors  enough  to  overthrow 
the  doctrine  of  plenary  inspiration,  but  these  errors 
are  missing  to  such  a  degree  as  to  leave  a  very 
strong  conviction  on  the  mind  that  human  agency 
was  not  left  alone  in  its  composition. 

We  should  nof  be  surprised  to  find  that  writers 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR  COMPOSITION    57 

who  lacked  the  training  necessary  for  the  work  of 
the  historian  should  allow  errors,  in  regard  to  mat- 
ters incidental  to  their  main  design,  to  creep  into 
their  writings.  The  four  evangelists  may  have 
given  us  a  faithful  account  of  the  events  in  our 
]jord's  life  of  which  they  were  eye-witnesses,  even 
though  their  books  were  open  to  criticism  in  the 
passages  which  allude  to  a  complex  political  system. 
But  the  most  searching  criticism  brings  to  light  no 
error  in  their  pages.  And  this  is  the  more  remark- 
able, inasmuch  as  the  Gospels  and  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  cover  a  period  in  the  history  of  Palestine 
which  is  marked  by  sudden  and  frequent  political 
changes.  Within  half  a  century  this  little  strip  of 
country  was  "a  single  united  kingdom  under  a 
native  ruler;  a  set  of  principalities  under  native 
ethnarchs  and  tetrarchs ;  a  country  in  part  contain- 
ing such  principalities,  in  part  reduced  to  the  con- 
dition of  a  Roman  province;  a  kingdom  reunited 
once  more  under  a  native  sovereign,  and  a  country 
reduced  Avholly  under  Rome  and  governed  by  pro- 
curators dependent  on  the  president  of  Syria,  but 
still  subject,  in  certain  respects,  to  the  Jewish  mon- 
arch of  a  neighbouring  territory."  How  do  we  ex- 
plain the  fact  that  four  writers,  who,  we  may  sup- 
pose, had  not  had  the  experience  which  would  fit 


58        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

them  for  close  attention  to  the  details  of  government, 
were  able  to  thread  their  way  with  discriminating 
accuracy  through  the  confusing  system  of  mixed 
Roman  and  Jewish  politics  ?  Perhaps  it  would  be 
too  much  to  say  that  Luke  could  not  have  obtained 
without  supernatural  aid  the  minute  information 
which  he  has  embodied  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles. 
But  it  will  certainly  appear  strange  to  any  one  who 
will  consider  it,  that  the  companion  of  the  Apostle 
Paul,  visiting  the  different  cities  of  the  Mediterra- 
nean for  the  purpose  rather  of  introducing  a  new 
religion  than  of  gathering  information,  should  show 
such  minute  acquaintance  with  the  details  of  Roman 
government  and  jurisprudence,  and  should  be  able 
to  refer  without  mistake  to  local  customs  and  make 
use  of  w^ords  of  only  local  currency.  An  ordinary 
writer,  to  whose  main  design  these  matters  were 
purely  incidental,  would  not  have  been  particular 
to  tell  us  that  Sergius  Paulus  was  a  proconsul 
[duduTTazoZj  translated  deputy  in  our  version),  or 
that  the  rulers  of  Thessalonica  were  called  j^oli- 
tarxhsj  or  that  Philippi  was  a  colony,  or  that  the 
most  prominent  man  in  Ephesus  was  called  towm- 
clerk  {jj-paiifiazeh^),  or  that  the  word  which  the 
Ephesians  used  to  signify  a  worshipper  means  lite- 
rally a  temple-sioeeper  {vecoxopov).     Xor  would  it  be 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR  COMPOSITION.    59 

possible,  without  special  labour,  to  avoid  confusion, 
if  he  should  attempt,  in  casual  references  to  the  po- 
litical status  of  different  cities  or  t.  their  officials,  to 
make  use  of  technical  phrases.  Yet  Luke  makes 
no  mistake,  never  misapplies  his  epithets  and  never 
takes  shelter  under  general  terms.  We  should 
hardly  have  supposed  that  the  author  of  the  book 
of  Acts  had  acquired  such  minute  acquaintance 
with  nautical  terms  and  nautical  affairs  that  he 
could  give  a  detailed  account  of  Paul's  perilous 
voyage  from  Jerusalem  to  Rome.  Yet  this  account 
has  been  laboriously  examined  and  carefully  com- 
pared with  known  facts  of  the  present  day  by  per- 
sons professionally  conversant  with  nautical  matters. 
The  result  has  been,  not  only  to  establish  the  veri- 
table and  trustworthy  character  of  the  narrative, 
but  to  enable  the  whole  voyage  to  be  traced  as  ac- 
curately as  if  a  log-book  of  the  particulars  had 
been  handed  down  from  that  day  to  this.* 

And  let  it  be  remembered  that  this  minute  accu- 
racy extends  to  the  whole  Bible.  There  is  cer- 
tainly a  very  decided  indication  that  supernatural 
agency  was  employed  in  the  composition  of  the 
Scriptures,  in  the  fact  that  a  volume  comprising 
sixty  different  compositions,  bridging  a  period  of 
^  Garbett,  God's  Word  Written,  p.  233. 


60       INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

four  thousand  years,  containing  revelations  of  the 
past  and  predictions  of  the  future,  embodying  the 
annals  of  a  nation  and  the  religious  experience  of 
individuals,  setting  forth  a  system  of  doctrine  for 
all  men  and  every  age,  and  yet  full  of  allusions  to 
matters  of  mere  local  interest,  is  absolutely  free 
from  error.  We  are  aware  that  exception  might 
be  taken  to  this  unqualified  statement  concerning 
the  accuracy  of  Scripture ;  but  it  is  true,  neverthe- 
less, that  the  appliances  of  the  most  exact  modern 
scholarship  have  been  brought  to  bear  upon  the 
study  of  the  Bible,  and  that,  with  the  exception  of 
a  few  cases  of  contradiction,  clearly  attributable  to 
the  fault  of  copyists,  the  deniers  of  inspiration 
have  not  been  able  to  prove  against  the  Scriptures 
the  charge  of  falsehood. 

(3.)  Motives  ascribed  to  men,  and  reasons  assigned 
for  divine  acts. 

The  sacred  writers  speak  as  assuredly  concerning 
the  motives  of  men  as  if  they  had  gained  admit- 
tance into  the  chambers  of  the  soul,  and  learned 
the  secrets  which  are  known  only  to  the  Searcher 
of  hearts.  They  even  go  so  far  as  to  tell  us  how 
human  actions  appear  in  God's  sight,  and  give  us 
circumstantial  interpretations  of  the  providential 
dealings  of  the  Most  High.     We  can  explain  this 


DIVi:t^E  AGENCY  IN  THEIR  COMPOSITION.    61 

peculiar  feature  in  the  sacred  histories  only  by  the 
supposition  that  the  authors  of  them  were  aided 
by  the  omniscient  One. 

We  read,  Exodus  xiv.  5,  "And  it  was  told  the 
king  of  Egypt  that  the  people  fled  ;  and  the  heart 
of  Pharaoh  and  of  his  servants  was  turned  against 
the  people,  and  they  said.  Why  have  we  done  this, 
that  we  have  let  Israel  go  from  serving  us  ?"  etc. 
How  did  Moses  know  how  Pharaoh  felt  or  what 
he  said  when  he  heard  of  Israel's  escape  ? 

Again,  1  Chron.  v.  26  :  "  And  the  God  of  Israel 
stirred  up  the  spirit  of  Pul  king  of  Assyria,  and 
the  spirit  of  Tilgath-pilneser  king  of  Assyria,  and 
he  carried  them  away,''  etc. 

2  Chron.  xxviii.  5 :  "  Wherefore  the  Lord  his 
God  delivered  him  into  the  hand  of  the  king  of 
Syria,"  etc.  Verse  19:  "For  the  Lord  brought 
Judah  low,  because  of  Ahaz  king  of  Israel,"  etc. 
2  Chron.  xxxvi.  15:  "And  the  Lord  God  of  their 
fathers  sent  to  them  by  his  messengers,  rising  up 
betimes  and  sending ;  because  he  had  compassion 
on  his  people  and  on  his  dwelling-place."  Verse 
.  17:  "Therefore  he  brought  upon  them  the  king 
of  the  Chaldees,  who  slew  their  young  men  with 
the  sword,"  etc. 

What   would   we   think    of  the   historian  who 


62        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

should  presume  to  state  the  reasons  which  swayed 
the  divine  mind  with  reference  to  national  history? 
"Who  hath  known  the  mind  of  the  Lord,  and 
who  hath  been  his  counsellor  ?'' 

1  Chron.  X.  13 :  "So  Saul  died  for  his  transgres- 
sion which  he  committed  against  the  Lord,"  etc. 

1  Chron.  xxi.  1  :  ^'  And  Satan  stood  up  against 
Israel,  and  provoked  David  to  number  Israel.'' 

How  did  the  sacred  writer  get  the  information 
which  he  has  given  us  in  these  verses  ? 

Matt.  ix.  21 :  "  For  she  said  within  herself,  If 
I  may  but  touch  his  garment  I  shall  be  whole." 

Verse  36  :  "  But  when  he  saw  the  multitude  he 
was  moved  with  compassion  on  them  because  they 
fainted,"  etc. 

Could  human  insight  discern  the  thoughts 
which  entered  the  mind  of  the  woman  when  she 
touched  the  hem  of  the  Saviour's  garment,  or  un- 
derstand the  feelings  of  Jesus  when  he  looked  upon 
the  multitude? 

If  these  passages  had  been  cited  at  an  earlier 
stage  in  our  investigation,  it  might  have  been 
said  that  they  expressed  only  the  surmises  of  the 
sacred  writers.  But  we  must  remember  that  the 
writers  of  Scripture  were  divinely  commissioned  to 
write  the  books  of  the  canon,  and  that  the  Bible 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR   COMrOSITION.    63 

is  an  authoritative  expression  of  God's  will.  We 
cannot  suppose  therefore  that  the  authors  of  Scrip- 
ture could  have  made  the  serious  assertions  which 
we  have  quoted,  and  allowed  them  to  stand  on  their 
pages  as  matters  of  history,  if  they  had  been  fic- 
tions of  their  own  brain.  The  statements  would 
not  have  been  made  if  the  writers  had  not  known 
them  to  be  true,  and  they  could  not  have  known 
them  to  be  true  unless  they  had  received  informa- 
tion from  God. 

Notice  now  that  these  quotations  do  not  belong 
to  the  class  of  passages  which  are  avowedly  the 
record  of  divine  communications.  The  writers  do 
not  tell  us  that  God  said  that  Satan  tempted  David 
to  number  Israel,  or  that  Saul  died  because  he 
asked  counsel  of  one  who  had  a  familiar  spirit. 
They  make  these  statements  in  the  same  way  that 
they  narrate  the  most  ordinary  facts.  On  the  sup- 
position that  the  whole  record  was  shaped  under 
divine  superintendence,  and  that  the  divine  mind 
aided  the  writers  in  the  performance  of  their  task,  it 
is  easy  to  understand  why  the  passages  we  have  quoted 
and  many  similar  ones  should  have  been  accom- 
panied by  no  special  reference  to  divine  revelation. 
But  if  the  sacred  writers,  though  acting  under 
divine  commission,  were,  notwithstanding,  the  sole 


64        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

authors  of  the  books  they  wrote,  it  is  strange  that 
when  they  made  statements  which  they  could  not 
or  ought  not  to  have  made  unless  they  received 
divine  revelations,  they  did  not  substantiate  their 
accounts  by  giving  their  authority. 

Of  course  it  does  not  follow  that  because  these 
and  similar  passages  must  have  been  written  at  the 
suggestion  of  God  or  by  his  assistance,  therefore 
the  whole  Bible  was  so  written.  They  are,  how- 
ever, in  a  measure,  confirmatory  of  a  very  strong 
presumption  in  favour  of  the  infallibility  of  the 
Scriptures;  and  the  argument  based  upon  them, 
though  not  demonstrative,  is  a  link  in  the  chain  of 
evidence  by  which  the  conviction  is  produced  that 
the  writers  of  Scripture  were  aided  in  the  work 
entrusted  to  them  by  contact  with  the  divine  mind. 

(4.)  Reticence  of  the  writers ,  and  their  wisdom  in 
the  selection  of  facts. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  sacred  writers 
were  divinely  commissioned.  AYe  may  suppose, 
moreover,  that  ample  resources  were  at  their  com- 
mand for  the  performance  of  their  work.  We  may 
grant  that,  possibly,  Moses  had  access  to  pre-exist- 
ing documents  in  writing  the  history  of  the  ante- 
diluvian world.  But  this  will  not  explain  the 
principle  by  which  the  writers  were  governed  in 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR   COMPOSITION.   05 

the  selection  of  facts.  We  cannot  suppose  that 
each  writer  Iiad  such  latitude  of  discretion  that 
he  was  allowed  to  put  on  record  just  what  he  sup- 
posed relevant  to  the  purpose  the  Scriptures  were 
designed  to  serve.  The  unity  which  pervades  the 
Bible  forbids  the  idea.  The  Bible  was  written 
with  reference  to  a  plan.  Its  parts  fit  into  each 
other  like  the  pieces  of  a  mosaic.  The  writers 
have  selected  with  consummate  wisdom  the  salient 
points  in  the  spiritual  history  of  man.  They  dis- 
pose in  a  few  sentences  of  topics  on  which  ordinary 
writers  love  to  dilate,  and  weave  their  materials 
into  the  form  best  adapted  for  the  exhibition  of 
a  progressive  plan  of  divine  grace.  For  the  accom- 
plishment of  this  task  they  needed,  it  seems  to 
me,  the  constant  guidance  of  divine  wisdom. 

It  is  a  noticeable  feature  in  the  Scriptures  that 
the  writers  often  omit  the  mention  of  details  in 
matters  concerning  which  we  are  naturally  curious, 
and  avoid  the  display  of  any  personal  feeling  on 
occasions  which  would  naturally  elicit  it. 

For  illustration  we  may  refer  to  the  evangelists. 
How  natural  it  would  have  been  for  them,  had  they 
been  ordinary  biographers,  to  have  given  us  more 
information  concerning  the  early  years  of  the  Sa- 
viour.    John,  especially,  whose  house  furnished  a 


G(j        INSPIRATION  OF  THE   SCRIPTURES. 

home  to  the  bereaved  mother  of  our  Lord,  we 
would  think,  was  in  possession  of  ample  materials 
for  this  work.  How  can  we  better  explain  this 
reticence  than  by  supposing  that  the  evangelists 
acted  under  divine  instructions?  Again,  how 
wonderfully  brief  and  unimpassioned  is  the  lan- 
guage of  the  evangelists  in  the  several  accounts  of 
our  Lord's  death !  They  all  record  the  circum- 
stances of  the  crucifixion,  but  not  a  syllable 
breathing  indignation  against  the  enemies  of  the 
Saviour  is  to  be  found  in  their  pages.  How 
strange  it  is  that  the  intimate  companions  of  Jesus 
should  write  his  life  without  giving  expression  to 
a  word  of  eulogy,  and  record  his  cruel  death  with- 
out entering  a  protest  against  the  sin  of  crucifying 
the  Lord  of  glory  ! 

(5.)  Relations  subsisting  betiveen  the  several  books 
of  the  New  Testament. 

The  argument  from  design  has  been  already  used 
to  show  that  the  several  books  of  the  Bible  stand 
on  the  same  level,  and  that  their  authors  held  a 
divine  commission  to  write  the  Scriptures.  We 
cannot  help  thinking  that  it  goes  farther — that  it 
testifies  to  a  direct  divine  influence  exerted  upon 
the  writers  in  the  composition  of  the  Bible.  Let 
us  illustrate  the  force  of  the  argument  by  reference 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR   COMPOSITION.  67 

to  the  relations  which  the  several  books  of  the  New 
Testament  sustain  to  each  other. 

The  New  Testament  opens  with  a  fourfold  bi- 
ography of  Christ.  It  was  right  that  we  should 
grow  familiar  with  his  life  before  we  were  taught 
the  doctrinal  import  of  his  work — right  that  we 
should  know  the  facts  on  which  the  doctrines  are 
based  before  our  attention  was  called  to  elaborate 
expositions  of  the  doctrines  themselves. 

The  four  evangelists  sustain  a  definite  relation 
to  each  other,  and  together  give  us  a  complete  por- 
traiture of  the  Saviour.  The  three  synoptic  gos- 
pels bring  into  greater  prominence  the  human  side 
of  Christ's  nature ;  while  the  gospel  according  to 
John  brings  out  with  greater  distinctness  the  di- 
vine side,  and  opens  with  the  sublime  announce- 
ment, "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,  and  the 
Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God.'* 
Again,  Matthew's  gospel  was  evidently  written  for 
the  Jew.  His  object  is  to  show  the  relation  of 
Christ  to  the  theocracy  as  the  Fulfiller  of  law  and 
prophecy.  Luke's  gospel  was  meant  for  the  Gen- 
.  tile;  he  accordingly  represents  Christ  not  as  related 
to  Judaism,  but  to  the  race.  While  Matthew's 
genealogy  shows  that  Christ  is  the  son  of  Abraham, 
Luke's  represents  him  as  a  descendant  of  Adam, 


68        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

and  therefore  the  brother  of  the  whole  human 
family. 

From  the  life  of  Jesus  we  turn  to  the  history  of 
the  society  of  which  he  was  the  founder.  The  first 
history  of  the  Christian  Church  was  written  by 
Luke,  and  we  read  it  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles, 
The  theme  of  apostolic  preaching  was  Christ — 
Christ  crucified,  Christ  risen.  The  former  was 
ihe  fact  of  greatest  doctrinal  importance — the  lat- 
ter was  the  fact  of  greatest  evidential  importance. 
With  these  two  facts  in  their  possession  they  were 
not  afraid  to  preach  even  in  Jerusalem  the  gospel 
of  reconciliation. 

We  are  enabled  in  the  book  of  Acts  to  watch  the 
first  steps  in  the  progress  of  the  infant  Church. 
The  gospel  was  preached  first  to  the  Jews,  then  to 
the  Samaritans,  then  to  Cornelius  by  Peter,  and 
then  to  the  world  at  large  by  the  great  apostle  of 
the  Gentiles.  By  degrees  the  channel  of  divine 
§race  widened ;  by  degrees,  as  Providence  opened 
the  way,  the  glad  tidings  spread ;  by  degrees  the 
purpose  of  God  to  include  the  Gentiles  in  the  em- 
brace of  the  gospel  disclosed  itself  to  those  who 
were  privileged  to  be  its  first  preachers. 

But  after  the  Jew  had  professed  faith  in  Christ, 
After  the  Gentile  had  cast  away  his  idols  and  num- 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THETR   COMPOSITION.    69 

benKi  himself  among  the  followers  of  Jesus — what 
then^  Was  the  work  complete?  Far  from  it. 
A  great  change  was  to  be  effected  in  the  character 
of  the  convert.  New  affections  were  to  be  im- 
planted— new  direction  given  to  the  energies — 
higher  views  of  life  were  to  be  instilled — more 
definite  ideas  of  doctrine  to  be  imparted — old  hab- 
its were  to  be  relinquished,  old  forms  of  thought 
to  be  abandoned.  Having  enlisted  in  Christ's  ser- 
vice, he  was  to  be  drilled ;  having  taken  his  place 
in  Christ's  school,  he  was  to  be  instructed.  The 
foundation  of  a  holy  life  being  laid,  he  must  be 
edified ;  being  justified,  he  was  to  be  sanctified* 
Accordingly,  the  succeeding  books  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament assume  the  epistolatory  form.  We  have  a 
collection  of  letters  addressed  to  those  who  are  al- 
ready in  the  Church — within  the  pale  of  Christian 
brotherhood — "  to  the  saints  and  faithful  brethren 
in  Christ  Jesus."  And  in  these  letters  we  have  a 
picture  of  early  Christian  piety  ;  we  have  an  oppor- 
tunity of  observing  the  influence  of  the  gospel 
upon  those  who  have  but  recently  embraced  it; 
we  become  acquainted  with  the  trials  through 
which  the  converts  from  heathenism  passed,  and 
the  temptations  to  which  they  were  exposed.  These 
letters  are  full  of  Christian  sympathy,  are  replete 


70        imriRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

with  principles  for  the  guidance  of  Christian 
life,  and  are  largely  occupied  with  expansions  of 
Christian  doctrine  and  exhortations  to  holj 
living. 

And,  what  is  more,  they  sustain  a  definite  rela- 
tion to  each  other.  We  have  the  Epistle  to  the 
Romans  devoted  to  the  settlement  of  the  question 
prompted  by  the  universal  conscience,  "  How  shall 
man  be  just  with  God  ?"  The  Epistles  to  the  Corin- 
thians, practical  in  their  aim,  with  an  exposition 
of  the  great  law  of  Christian  expediency,  and  writ- 
ten in  opposition  to  the  pride  of  Greek  philosophy 
and  the  licentiousness  of  a  Grecian  city;  and 
these  are  followed  by  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians, 
designed  to  strip  the  fetters  of  legalism  from  those 
whom  Christ  declared  to  be  free.  Each  fills  an 
important  place.  Each  contributes  to  the  full  un- 
folding of  the  plan  of  salvation — All  together  make 
one  symmetrical  organism,  one  consistent  body  of 
truth.  No  trace  of  disagreement  is  to  be  found 
in  the  doctrines  of  the  Epistles.  They  present  the 
truth  in  different  phases,  but  it  is  the  same  truth. 
Though  Peter  was  the  subject  of  Paul's  reproof,  we 
discover  no  divergence  in  his  Epistles  from  the  doc- 
trines taught  by  the  great  apostle.  "The  faith 
exjwunded  by  Paul   kindles  intu  fervent  ho{)e  in 


DIVINE  AGENCY  IN  THEIR  COMPOSITION  71 
the  words  of  Peter,  and  expands  into  sublime  love 
in  those  of  John."  * 

Can  we  believe  that  the  New  Testament  has  as- 
sumed its  present  form  by  accident?  Is  it  possible 
that  a  collection  of  writinjrs  exhibiting  a  progres- 
sive development  of  Christian  truth,  and  closing 
with  a  prophecy  concerning  the  future  glory  of  the 
Church,  could  have  been  produced  by  a  number  of 
writers  acting  without  concert,  unless  they  acted 
under  divine  influence  ? 

-  Bernard,  Progress  of  Doctrine  in  New  Testament. 

For  the  ideas  embodied  in  the  above  remarks  on  the  rela- 
tions of  the  several  books  of  the  New  Testament  to  each  other, 
the  writer  is  indebted  to  the  admirable  volume  of  the  Bamp- 
ton  Lectures. 


CHAPTER   V. 

PLENARY    INSPIRATION. 

THERE  is  still  room  for  inquiry  concerning  the 
extent  to  which  divine  agency  was  employed  in 
the  composition  of  Scripture.  Were  all  the  books 
of  the  Bible  written  under  supernatural  influence? — 
Canticles  as  well  as  the  Pentateuch,  Esther  as  well 
as  the  Acts?  Do  we  know  whether  the  divine 
mind  operated  on  the  writers  in  composing  every- 
thing which  they  had  put  on  record  ?  Was  the 
agency  which  God  exercised  in  the  structure  of  the 
Bible  akin  to  that  of  an  architect  in  the  erection  of 
an  edifice?  Did  he  only  superintend  the  work, 
suggesting  to  the  sacred  writers  what  fleets  to  em- 
body in  the  records,  and  giving  the  plan  according 
to  which  the  materials  were  to  be  shaped  ?  Did 
the  human  authors  of  Scripture  exercise  their  un- 
assisted faculties  in  composing  the  books  of  the 
Canon,  save  when  divine  revelntion  was  needed  to 
supplement  the  narrowness  of  human  knowledge, 

and  divine  wij^iom  to  correct   the  imperfections  of 

72 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  73 

human  judgment?  Or  did  God  exercise  such  an 
influence  on  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers  that 
every  part  of  the  Bible  is  a  product  of  the  divine 
mind  ?  Did  he  suggest  the  thoughts  which  have 
been  put  on  record,  and  leave  the  writers  to  the 
exercise  of  their  own  discretion  in  the  choice  of 
tuordsj  or  are  the  words  of  Scripture  the  words  of 
God  ?  In  short,  Have  God  and  man  'divided  the 
labour  of  composing  the  Bible,  and  do  they  therefore 
share  the  honour,  or  is  the  Bible  God's  book  from  be- 
ginning to  end  ?  These  questions  all  resolve  them- 
selves into  the  one  Avhich  I  shall  endeavour  to  an- 
swer in  this  chapter :  Do  the  Scriptures  teach  the 
doctrine  of  Partial  or  Plenary  Inspiration  ?  There 
is  ample  material  for  a  reply  to  this  inquiry,  at 
least  so  far  as  the  Old  Testament  is  concerned,  as 
the  following  considerations  will  show : 

(1.)  Names  applied  to  the  Old  Testament  by  W7'iters 
of  the  New. 

The  Old  Testament  is  referred  to  upward  of 
fifty  times  in  the  New  Testament  as  the  Scripture  or 
the  Scriptures,  In  Romans  i.  2,  it  is  called  the 
Holy  Scriptures  {jpaipalc.  ky'iat!;))  in  2  Tim.  iii.  15 
the  Hallowed  Writings  [Izpa  jp6.iip.axa) ;  in  Rom. 
iii.  2,  Heb.  V.  12,  |  Pet.  iv.  11,  The  Oracles  of 
God  {ra  Ibyia  zoi)  deou). 


74        n\SPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

The  word  ypaipv],  Scripture,  it  is  true,  may  be 
applied  as  well  to  one  kind  of  writing  as  another. 
But  the  point  to  be  noticed  is,  that  it  is  employed 
in  the  New  Testament  in  a  restricted  sense.  It  is 
always  used  to  designate  the  Old  Testament,  to- 
gether with  portions  of  the  New.  Hence,  though 
applicable  to  every  species  of  composition,  it  has  in 
New  Testament  usage  the  force  of  a  proper  name, 
just  as  our  word  Bible  has.  When  the  evange- 
list spake  of  the  Scriptures^  there  was  no  danger  of 
their  being  misunderstood.  There  was  no  neces- 
sity for  asking,  What  Scriptures  ?  any  more  than 
there  is  any  doubt  what  work  we  refer  to  when  we 
speak  of  the  Book  or  the  Bible.  It  is  clear,  there- 
fore, that  the  Old  Testament  held  such  a  place  in 
the  minds  of  the  apostles  and  of  the  whole  Hebrew 
people  that  it  was  considered  as  the  writings  par  ex- 
cellence. And  further,  the  application  of  a  common 
name  to  the  whole  Old  Testament  places  all  the 
books  on  the  same  level.  If  one  book  ranks  as  a 
divine  writing,  we  cannot  give  a  lower  place  to 
another.  If  some  of  the  books  were  divine  writings 
and  others  only  human  compositions,  we  should 
expect  to  find  the  distinction  indicated  in  some  way. 
But  nothing-  of  the  kind  is  l^ited  at  in  the  New 
Testament.     The  whole  Hebrew  Bible  is  included 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  75 

under  the  epithets,  Holy  Scripture,  the  Hallowed 
Writings,  the  Oracles  of  God. 

(2.)  Deference  paid  to  the  Old  Testament. 

The  references  to  the  Old  Testament  which  we 
find  in  the  Gospels,  the  Acts  and  the  Epistles  prove 
that  their  writers  regarded  it  not  only  as  an  author- 
ity, but  as  an  infallible  authority;  not  only  as  a 
record  of  divine  communications,  but  as  one  un- 
mixed with  human  error.  They  appeal  with  per- 
fect confidence  to  the  Old  Testament,  and  plainly 
tell  us  that  the  Scripture  must  be  fulfilled.  They 
do  this,  moreover,  without  any  protest  on  the  part 
of  the  Jewish  nation.  However  much  the  Jews 
rejected  the  reasonings  which  the  apostles  based  on 
the  Old  Testament,  we  have  no  hint  that  they  ever 
denied  the  infallibility  of  the  orac^les  of  which  they 
were  made  the  guardians.  Passages  are  quoted 
from  the  Old  Testament  as  predictions  verified  in 
New  Testament  history,  the  relevancy  of  which 
depends  upon  the  assumption  that  they  are  a  cor- 
rect— a  verbally  correct — report  of  divine  communi- 
cations. We  may  illustrate  this  by  reference  to  the 
Gospel  according  to  Matthew :  "  When  he  arose  he 
took  the  young  child  and  his  mother  by  night  and 
departed  into  Egyptf  and  was  there  till  the  death 
of  Herod,  that  it  might   be  fulfilled   which  was 


76       INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES'. 

spoken  of  the  Lord  by  the  prophet,  saying,  Out  of 
Egypt  have  I  called  my  son."  Matt.  ii.  14,  15: 
see  Hosea  xi.  1.  "He  departed  into  Galilee,  and 
leaving  Nazareth,  he  came  and  dwelt  in  Capernaum, 
which  is  upon  the  sea-coast  in  the  borders  of  Zabu- 
lon  and  Nephthalim,  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which 
was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet,  saying,  The 
land  of  Zabulon  and  the  land  of  Nephthalim  by  the 
way  of  the  sea  beyond  Jordan,  Galilee  of  the  Gen- 
tiles ;  the  people  which  sat  in  darkness  saw  a  great 
light,  and  to  them  which  sat  in  the  region  and 
shadow  of  death  light  is  sprung  up."  Matt,  iv,  12; 
see  Isa.  ix.  1.  "Then  sent  Jesus  two  disciples, 
saying  unto  them.  Go  into  the  village  over 
against  you,  and  straightway  ye  shall  find  an  ass 
tied  and  a  colt  with   her ;   loose  them  and   bring 

them  unto  me All  this  was  done  that 

the  Scripture  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken 
by  the  prophet,  saying.  Tell  ye  the  daughter  of  Zion, 
Behold  thy  King  cometh  unto  thee,  meek,  and  sit- 
ting on  an  ass,  and  a  colt  the  foal  of  an  ass."  Matt, 
xxi.  1,  5;  see  Zech.  ix.  9.  "These  parted  his  gar- 
ments, casting  lots,  that  it  might  be  fulfilled  which 
was  spoken  by  the  prophet.  They  parted  my  gar- 
ments amf  ng  them,  and  upon  my  vesture  did  they 
cast  lots."     Matt,  xxvii.  35;  Ps.  xxii.  18. 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  77 

The  confidence  with  which  the  evangelist  makes 
these  citations  is  a  proof  that  the  infallibility  of 
the  Old  Testament  was  a  settled  point  in  the  mind 
of  the  writer  and  in   the  minds  of  his  Hebrew 
readers.     For  it  is  clear  that  if  error  is  anywhere 
incorporated  in  the  Old  Testament,  only  revelation 
can  bring  it  to  light.  If  the  writers  of  Scripture  have 
mixed  their  own  sentiments  with  the  divine  com- 
munications, it  is  not  in  the  power  of  human  dis- 
cernment to  separate  one  from  the  other.     It  would 
be  impossible,  therefore,  in  that  case,  to  speak  pos- 
itively of  any  particular  verse  or  clause  of  a  verse 
and  say  that  it  is  the  word  of  God.     Unless  the 
Old  Testament  is  an  infallible  expression  of  God's 
mind,  the  language  of  the  evangelist  is  open  to 
very  serious  criticism,  and  room  is  afforded  for  the 
charge  that  Matthew  has  based  very  weighty  in- 
ferences on  very  insufficient  testimony.     For  the 
question  very  naturally  arises.  How  do  we  know 
whether  the  passages  which  have  been  cited  are  not 
human  utterances,  w^hich  have  been  inadvertently 
incorporated  in  the  divine  message?     If  error  is 
,  present  anywhere  in  the  Old  Testament,  why  may 
not  these  very  citations  be  open  to  this  objection  ? 
Nor  does  it  relieve  the  difficulty  to  say  that  the 
authority  of  the  passai^es  quoted  by  the  evangelist 


78        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

is  indicated  by  the  fact  that  Matthew  was  divinely 
commissioned  to  write  his  gospel,  and  must  there- 
fore have  been  in  a  position  to  speak  positively 
regarding  these  citations.  This  does  not  alter  the 
fact  that  Matthew  appealed  to  these  passages  on 
the  simple  ground  that  they  are  contained  in  the 
Old  Testament.  The  force  of  his  citations  consists 
in  the  fact  that  in  addressing  Jewish  readers  he 
appealed  to  an  authority  whose  infallibility  they 
were  prepared  to  admit.  They  had  no  supernatural 
means  of  discriminating  truth  from  error,  and 
therefore,  unless  they  were  ready  to  concede  that 
everything  in  the  Old  Testament  carried  the  divine 
sanction,  it  could  not  be  expected  that  they  should 
see  any  propriety  in  the  assertions  that  the  leading 
events  in  the  life  of  Christ  were  shaped  so  as  to 
bring  about  the  fulfilment  of  some  incidental  ex- 
pressions scattered  through  the  writings  of  the 
prophets.  The  phrase,  "  that  it  might  be  fulfilled^'' 
which  occurs  so  often  in  the  gospels,  proves  that 
the  evangelists  and  those  to  whom  they  addressed 
themselves  shared  a  common  belief  in  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Old  Testament. 

(3.)   This  infallibility  asserted  by  the  Saviour. 

•Tesus  gave  very  explicit  testimony  on  this  point. 
It  will  be  sufficient  to  quoi^  the  passages  which 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  79 

contain  it.  "  And  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto 
them,  are  ye  come  as  against  a  thief  with  swords 
and  with  staves  to  take  me?  I  was  daily  with 
vou  in  the  temple,  teaching  and  ye  took  me  not ; 
but  the  Scripture  must  be  fulfilled.^'  Mark  xiv.  49. 
"Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them.  Ye  do  err,  not 
knowing  the  Scriptures  nor  the  power  of  God." 
Matt.  xxii.  29.  "  And  he  (Jesus)  said  unto  them, 
O  fools  and  slow  of  heart  to  believe  all  that  the 
prophets  have  spoken  !  Ought  not  Christ  to  have 
suffered  these  things,  and  to  enter  into  his  glory  ? 
And  beginning  at  Moses  and  all  the  prophets,  he 
expounded  unto  them  in  all  these  Scriptures  the 
things  concerning  himself.'^  Luke  xxiv.  25-27. 

"  And  he  said.  These  are  the  words  which  I 
spake  unto  you  while  I  was  yet  with  you,  that 
all  things  must  be  fulfilled  which  ivere  written  in  the 
law  of  Moses,  and  m  the  jprophets  and  in  the  Psalms 
concerning  me.  Then  opened  he  their  understand- 
ing that  they  might  understand  the  Scriptures, 
and  said  unto  them.  Thus  it  is  written,  and  thus 
it  behooved  Christ  to  suffer,"  etc.  Luke  xxiv. 
44-46. 

"  Think  not  that  I  am  come  to  destroy  the  law 
or  the  prophets ;  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but  to 
fulfil,  for  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  Till  heaven  and 


80        INSPIRA'HON  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  no  tmse  pass 
from  the  law  till  all  be  fulfilled:'  Matt.  v.  17,  18. 

The  names,  Serlptu7^e,  the  Law  and  the  Prophets^ 
the  Law,  the  Prophets,  and  the  Psalms,  employed  by 
our  Saviour,  were  familiar  to  Jewish  ears,  and  cov- 
ered the  entire  volume  of  Old  Testament  writings. 
The  words  of  Jesus  which  we  have  just  quoted 
put  the  stamp  of  infallibility  upon  the  Hebrew 
Bible. 

(4.)    Verbal  references  to  the  Old  Testament. 

If  the  evidence  which  has  been  already  advanced 
is  not  considered  strong  enough  to  shut  out  the 
possibility  of  any  error  in  the  Old  Testament,  let 
it  be  noticed  that  we  have  the  most  emphatic  testi- 
mony to  the  infallibility  of  its  very  words.  On  a 
single  word  in  the  Old  Testament  our  Saviour 
based  his  reply  to  those  who  denied  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection  :  ^'  But  as  touching  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  dead,  have  ye  not  read  that  which  was 
spoken  unto  you  by  God,  saying,  I  am  the  God  oi 
Abraham,  and  the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  God  of 
Jacob?  God  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead,  but  of 
the  living.''  Matt.  xxii.  31,  32. 

In  defending  himself  from  the  charge  of  blas- 
phemy, he  makes  use  of  a  single  word  in  the 
eighty-second  Psalm:  "Jesus  answered  them,  Is  it 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  81 

not  written  in  your  law,  I  said  ye  are  gods?  If 
he  called  them  gods  to  whom  the  word  of  God 
came,  and  the  Scripture  cannot  be  broken,  say  ye 
of  him  whom  the  Father  hath  sanctified  and  sent 
into  the  world.  Thou  blasphemest,  because  I  said  I 
am  the  Son  of  God  ?"  John  x.  34.  Our  Saviour 
justifies  in  parenthesis  his  appeal  to  this  expression 
in  the  eighty-second  Psalm,  by  reminding  his  hear- 
ers of  the  infallibility  of  the  Scriptures.  The  pas- 
sage is  of  great  value  in  the  discussion  of  the  sub- 
ject of  inspiration,  for  it  shows  that  our  Saviour 
considered  that  not  the  thoughts  merely,  but  the 
language  also,  of  Holy  Writ  possessed  divine  au- 
thority, since  he  made  the  solemn  utterance.  And 
the  Scfi'iplures  cannot  be  broken,  in  order  to  justify 
an  argument  based  on  a  single  word. 
,  Notice  the  instances  in  which  the  correspondence 
between  Old  Testament  prediction  and  New  Testa- 
ment fulfilment  depends  on  single  words.  We  may 
refer  to  the  "  thirty  pieces  of  silver/'  the  "potter's 
field,''  "  the  parting  of  the  garmen/s,"  as  illustra- 
tions. If  we  are  prepared  to  say  that  these  allu- 
sions were  regarded  by  the  sacred  writers  as  only 
remarkable  coincidences,  we  should  not  allow  them 
much  weight  in  the  argument.  But  inasmuch  as 
the  New  Testament  was  written  by  men  divinely 


82        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

commissioned,  we  must  suppose  that  the  writers 
were  honest  in  what  they  say,  and  competent  there- 
fore to  speak  on  the  subject.  Their  mention  of 
these  incidents  in  our  Lord's  life  as  fulfilments  of 
the  Old  Testament  predictions  must  be  regarded 
as  proof  that  the  divine  agency  employed  in  the 
composition  of  Scripture  extended  even  to  the 
choice  of  words. 

Let  us  turn  to  the  Epistles  of  Paul^  and  we  shall 
find  that  verbal  quotations  from  the  Old  Testament 
are  extensively  employed  by  that  apostle  for  argu- 
mentative purposes.  "  St  Paul  rests  his  proof  that 
the  Jews  as  well  as  the  Gentiles  were  concluded 
under  sin  on  two  little  words  occurring  in  the 
fourteenth  Psalm  —  on  the  word  *none'  in  the 
first  verse,  and  on  the  word  ^alP  in  the  third. 
Let  these  two  little  words  be  changed,  and  the 

apostle's  argument  falls  at  once He  teaches 

the  equality  of  all  men  before  God,  and  the  free- 
dom of  this  divine  mode  of  saving,  on  the  au- 
thority of  a  single  emphatic  word  used  by  the 
prophet  Joel  —  '  whosoever.'  On  this  word  he 
elaborately  argues,  Rom  x.  12  :  'There  is  no  dif- 
ference between  the  Jew  and  the  Greek,  for  the 
same  Lord  over  all  is  rich  unto  all  that  call  upon 
him.'     Then  comes  the  authority  for  the  assertion  -. 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  83 

*  For  whosoever  shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord  shall  be  saved.'  ....  In  arguing  in  Gal. 
iii.  16,  that  the  promise  of  eternal  life  is  annexed 
to  faith  and  not  to  human  merit,  he  argues  not 
alone  from  a  single  word,  but  from  a  single  letter— 
from  the  fact  that  a  word  is  used  in  the  singular, 
not  in  the  plural, '  He  saith  not,  And  to  seeds,  as  of 
many,  but  as  of  one,  and  to  thy  seed,  which  is 
Christ.'"* 

Some  writers  see  in  these  citations  only  evidences 
of  false  reasoning  on  the  part  of  the  apostles.    And 
we  must  confess   that  if  the  quotations  from  the 
Old  Testament  are  the  words  of  mere  human  au- 
thors, they  have  been  adduced  with  unpardonable 
looseness.     Unless  the  words  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  invested  with  divine  authority,  it  will  be  diffi- 
cult to  escape  the  conviction  that  the  most  weighty 
conclusions  have  been  based  on  very  frivolous  prem- 
ises.    But   we  know  too  much  of  Paul's  honesty 
and  Paul's  logic  to  charge  him  with  such  argumen- 
tative unfairness,  and  Ibecause  we  cannot  take  the 
position  of  the  skeptic,  we  are  obliged  to  conclude 
^  that  these  citations  give  the  strongest  testimony  to 
the  verbal   infallibility  of  the  whole  Old  Testa- 
ment.    I  say,  of  the  ivhole  Old  Testc^mi,  for  there 
*  Garbett,  p.  312. 


84        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES, 

is  no  reason  for  supposing  that  these  passages  which 
have  been  cited  occupy  a  different  rank  from  others 
which  have  received  no  special  mention.  Besides, 
we  must  remember  that  the  apostle's  reasoning 
proceeds  on  this  assumption.  A  premise  is  sup- 
pressed in  his  argument,  and  that  is  the  admitted 
infallibility  of  the  Scriptures.  Single  words  are 
available  for  purposes  of  argument,  because  they 
are  contained  in  the  Scriptures.  Deny  the  verbal 
infallibility  of  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole,  and 
it  will  be  impossible  for  us  to  attach  much  import- 
ance to  arguments  based  on  particular  passages. 

(5.)  Direct  assertions  of  divine  authorship. 

The  best — I  may  say,  the  only — way  of  accounting 
for  the  absolute  authority  which  we  find  the  words 
of  Scripture  to  possess,  is  to  suppose  that  the 
sacred  writers  were  influenced  in  their  choice  of 
language  by  the  divine  mind.  Having  proved  the 
verbal  infallibility  of  the  Old  Testament,  its  divine 
authorship  seems  to  follow  as  a  necessary  conse- 
quence. At  all  events,  very  little  Scripture  testi- 
mony will  be  sufficient  to  make  the  argument  for 
plenary  inspiration  conclusive. 

There  are  two  passages  which  give  testimony  to 
the  divine  authorship  of  the  Old  Testament,  from 
the  singular  use  of  the  word  Scripture.     Thus  we 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  85 

read^  Rom.  ix.^  '^  For  the  Scripture  saith  unto 
Pharaoh,  Even  for  this  same  purpose  have  I  raised 
thee  up,  that  I  might  show  my  power  in  thee,  and 
that  my  name  might  be  declared  throughout  the 
earth/'  Gal.  iii.  8  :  "  The  Scripture,  foreseeing  that 
God  would  justify  the  heathen  through  faith, 
preached  before  the  gospel  unto  Abraham,  saying, 
In  thee  shall  all  nations  be  blessed."  These  pas- 
sages are  not  parallel  to  those  in  which  Scripture 
is  personified  and  quotations  are  prefaced  with  the 
words,  "  Thus  saith  the  Scripture.'^  Here  it  is 
represented  as  saying  what  was  said  by  God,  of 
doing  what  was  done  by  God,  of  wearing  attribute^' 
which  belong  only  to  God.  This  can  be  explained 
only  by  the  supposition  that  the  apostle  was  so 
thoroughly  convinced  that  the  words  of  the  Old 
Testament  are  the  utterances  of  God  that  Scrip- 
ture is  identified  with  its  author,  and  the  acts 
of  the  latter  are  represented  as  being  done  by  the 
former.  There  are  passages,  particularly  in  the  Epis- 
tle to  the  Hebrews,  in  which  the  words  of  Scripture 
are  quoted  as  those  of  God.  Heb.  i.  5  :  "  For  unto 
which  of  the  angels  said  he  at  any  time.  Thou  art 
my  Son  ?''  and  verse  7  :  "  And  of  the  angels  he 
saith."  Verse  8:  "But  unto  the  Son  he  saith." 
viii.  8:    *  For  finding  fault  with  them,  he  saith." 


86        lySPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

Verse  13:  ^*  In  that  he  saith,  A  new  covenant,  he 
iiath  made  the  first  old."  This  mode  of  citation, 
which  is  peculiar  to  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  is 
a  strong  testimony  to  the  divine  authorship  of  the 
Old  Testament.  The  Scriptures  must  have  been 
regarded  as  equivalent  to  the  utterances  of  God,  or 
there  would  have  been  no  propriety  in  making 
quotations  from  them  with  the  preface,  "IZe 
saith/'  instead  of,  ^'  It  is  written.^^ 

Again,  passages  are  cited  from  the  Scriptures  as 
the  words  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Heb.  iii.  7 :  "  Where- 
fore, as  the  Holy  Ghost  saith.  To-day,  if  ye  will 
hear  his  voice,  harden  not  your  hearts,"  etc.  Heb. 
X.  15:  '^Whereof  the  Holy  Ghost  also  is  a  witness 
to  us :  for  after  that  he  had  said  before,  This  is  the 
covenant  that  I  will  make  with  them  after  those 
days,  saith  the  Lord ;  I  will  put  my  laws  into  their 
hearts,  and  in  their  minds  will  I  write  them,"  etc. 
The  union  of  the  divine  and  human  agencies  in  the 
composition  of  Scripture  is  set  forth  in  the  follow- 
ing quotations:  Acts  iv.  24:  ^*And  when  they 
heard  that,  they  lifted  up  their  voice  to  God  with 
one  accord  and  said.  Lord,  thou  art  God  who  hast 
made  heaven  and  earth,  and  the  sea  and  all  that  in 
them  is,  who,  by  the  mouth  of  thy  servant  David,  hast 
said  J  Why  did   the  heathen  rage  and   the  people 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  87 

imagine  a  vain  thing?"  Acts  i.  16:  "And  in  those 
days  Peter  stood  up  in  the  midst  of  the  disciples 
and  said,  ....  Men  and  brethren,  this  Scripture 
must  needs  have  been  fulfilled  which  the  Holy  Ghost, 
by  the  mouth  of  David,  spake  before  concerning 
Judas,"  etc. 

There  are  two  passages  which  directly  assert  the 
inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament.  2  Pet.  i.  20 : 
"  Knowing  this  first,  that  no  prophecy  of  the  Scrip- 
ture is  of  any  private  interpretation.  For  the  pro- 
phecy came  not  in  old  time  by  the  will  of  man,  but 
holy  men  of  old  spake  as  they  were  moved  by  the 
Holy  Ghost:'  2  Tim.  iii.  15,  16  :  "And  that  from 
a  child  thou  hast  known  the  holy  Scriptures  {ra  hpa 
fpafifiara),  which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise  unto 
salvation  through  faith,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus. 
All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God/'  etc. 
(j:d(Ta  YpaifTj  deoKvzoavoQ).  This  passage,  viewed  in 
the  light  of  the  foregoing  evidence,  must  be  re- 
garded as  conclusive  testimony  to  the  plenary  in- 
spiration of  the  Old  Testament. 

It  will  not  affect  the  argument  to  translate  this 
passage.  All  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration,  or 
every  Scripture  given  by  inspiration  of  God  is 
profitable.  The  reference  in  either  case  is  to  the 
whole  Old  Testament,  alluded  to  in  the  previous 


88        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

verse  as  the  holy  Scriptures — Upd  ypap-jiara,  II 
ihe  first  translation  is  a  correct  one,  the  passage  is 
an  assertion  of  inspiration  on  the  part  of  the  apostle. 
If  the  second  be  the  true  rendering,  inspiration  is 
alluded  to  as  an  admitted  truth,  and  made  the 
ground  for  the  assertion  that  the  Scriptures  are 
able  to  make  wise  unto  salvation.  However  trans- 
lated, the  passage  must  be  regarded  as  testimony  to 
the  theopneustic  character  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures. Aside  from  the  evidence  which  we  have 
already  considered,  we  could  not  rest  a  very  posi- 
tive argument  on  this  single  passage,  for  dis- 
cussion might  arise  on  the  exact  meaning  of  the 
word  deonveuffTO^,  This  expression  must  be  inter- 
preted in  the  light  of  the  foregoing  evidence.  The 
conclusions  we  have  already  reached  may  be  fairly 
used  to  help  us  in  our  attempt  to  define  its  mean- 
ing; for  this  meaning,  whatever  it  be,  must  be 
compatible  with  the  facts  already  discovered.  We 
find  that  the  Scriptures  give  evidence  of  the  pres- 
ence of  the  divine  mind  in  their  composition  ;  that 
the  New  Testament  writers  regarded  the  Old  Tes- 
tament as  infallible,  and  rest  elaborate  arguments 
on  single  words  taken  from  its  pages;  that  pas- 
sages are  quoted  as  the  utterances  of  God,  and  that 
other?  are  ascribed  to  the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  author 


PLENARY  INSPIRATION.  89 

of  them.  In  asserting,  therefore,  that  the  Old  Tes- 
tament is  theopneustic — God-breathed — the  apostle 
must  have  meant  that  the  sacred  writers  were  in- 
fluenced even  in  their  choice  of  words  by  the  Holy 
Ghost. 

"  The  New  Testament  canonizes  the  Old ;  the 
Incarnate  Word  sets  his  seal  on  the  Written 
Word.  The  Incarnate  Word  is  God — therefore, 
the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament  is  authenti- 
cated by  God  himself."*  The  testimony  to  the 
inspiration  of  the  New  Testament  is,  we  confess, 
less  explicit  and  not  so  abundant.  We  might  ex- 
pect this  to  be  the  case,  from  the  simple  fact  that 
God's  message  was  completed  in  the  writings  of  the 
New  Testament.  The  apostles  were  the  legitimate 
successors  of  the  prophets,  and,  as  such,  gave  ample 
testimony  to  their  inspiration ;  but  the  apostles 
themselves  had  no  successors.  Besides,  when  the 
inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament  is  established,  but 
little  evidence  is  needed  to  warrant  the  inference 
that  the  New  is  likewise  inspired.  The  Old  and 
New  Testaments  are  parts  of  the  same  divine  mes- 
sage. They  constitute  a  progressive  unity;  they 
exhibit  the  development  of  a  single  plan  of  salva- 
tion.    Can  we  suppose  that  the  Old  Testament  is 

*Word'^vorth  on  the  Canon,  p.  51,  Am.  ed. 


90        INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

God's  word  and  the  New  Testament  only  man's 
word  ?  Are  the  Gospels  human  productions,  while 
the  Pentateuch  is  an  inspired  writing  ?  The  pre- 
sumption in  favor  of  the  inspiration  of  the  New 
Testament  is  so  strong  that  only  very  decided  evi- 
dence to  the  contrary  could  make  us  doubt  it.  It 
must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  gift  of  inspiration 
was  distinctly  promised  by  our  Saviour  to  his  dis- 
ciples :  "  When  they  bring  you  unto  the  synagogues 
and  unto  magistrates  and  powers,  take  ye  no  thought 
how  or  what  thing  ye  shall  answer  or  what  ye  shall 
say :  for  the  Holy  Ghost  shall  teach  you  in  the  same 
hour  what  ye  ought  to  say."  Luke  xii.  11,  12. 
"  When  they  shall  lead  you  and  deliver  you  up, 
take  no  thought  beforehand  what  ye  shall  speak, 
neither  do  ye  premeditate;  but  whatsoever  shall  be 
given  you  in  that  hour, that  speak  ye:  for  it  is  not 
ye  that  speak,  but  the  Holy  Ghost."  Mark  xiii.  11. 
"  Settle  it  therefore  in  your  heart  not  to  meditate 
before  what  ye  shall  answer :  for  I  will  give  you  a 
mouth  and  wisdom  which  all  your  adversaries  shall 
not  be  able  to  gainsay  nor  resist."  Luke  xxi.  14. 
The  apostles,  moreover,  claimed  to  speak  by  divine 
guidance :  "  I  say  the  truth  in  Christ ;  I  lie  not ; 
my  conscience  also  bearing  me  witness  in  the  Holy 
Ghost."    Romans  ix.  1.     ''  Which  things  also  we 


PLENARY   INSPIRATION.  91 

speak,  not  in  words  which  man's  wisdom  teacheth, 
but  in  words  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth,  com- 
paring spiritual  things  with  spiritual"  (1  Cor.  ii. 
13 — 7[p£UjULaTixo7^  nueufxaTixd  aoyxpivovre^;)  "joining 
spiritual  things  to  spiritual  words."  See  Hodge 
on  1  Cor.  in  loc.  "  I  told  you  before,  and  foretell 
you,  as  if  I  were  present,  the  second  time ;  and  being 
absent  now  I  write  to  them  who  heretofore  have 
sinned  and  to  all  other,  that  if  I  come  again  I  will 
not  spare,  since  ye  seek  a  proof  of  Christ  speaking 
in  me  which  to  youward  is  not  weak,  but  is  mighty 
in  you."  2  Cor.  xiii.  2,  3.  It  may  be  said,  how- 
ever, that  these  passages,  after  all,  only  prove  that 
the  apostles  were  inspired  in  their  oral  utterances. 
But  would  they  be  inspired  to  speak  and  not  be  in- 
spired to  write  f  Is  it  likely  that  if  they  were  in- 
spired when  called  before  a  human  tribunal,  they 
were  left  to  the  exercise  of  their  fallible  judgment 
in  composing  the  books  which  should  nourish  the 
faith  of  God's  people  in  every  age?  Certainly 
Paul  did  not  suppose  that  so  wide  a  difference  ex- 
isted between  his  oral  and  his  written  instructions 
when  lie  said  to  the  Thessalonians,  "  Stand  fast  and 
hold  the  traditions  which  ye  have  been  taught, 
whether  by  word  or  our  epistle.'^  2  Thess.  ii.  15. 
With  the  quotation  of  a  single  passage  fiom  the 


92       INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

Second  Epistle  of  Peter  we  shall  close  the  evidence 
on  the  question  of  New  Testament  inspiration.  It 
is  one  in  which  the  Epistles  of  Paul  are  recognized 
as  co-ordinate  in  point  of  authority  with  the  Old 
Testament  writings :  "  Even  as  our  beloved  brother 
Paul  also,  according  to  the  wisdom  given  unto  him, 
hath  written  unto  you,  as  also  in  all  his  epistles, 
speaking  in  them  of  these  things,  in  which  are  some 
things  hard  to  be  understood,  which  they  that  are 
unlearned  and  unstable  wrest  as  they  do  also  the 
other  Scriptures  unto  their  own  destruction."  2 
Pet.  iii.  15-17. 

We  are  led,  as  the  result  of  our  inquiries,  to  the 
irresistible  conclusion  that  the  books  of  the  Bible 
— constituting,  as  they  do,  a  unity;  contributing 
severally  to  the  development  of  a  single  scheme 
of  divine  grace;  claiming  to  be  a  message  to  men 
from  God ;  speaking  in  terms  of  authority  concern- 
ing duty  and  destiny — were  composed  by  men  who 
acted  under  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to 
such  an  extent  that  they  were  preserved  from 
every  error  of  fact,  of  doctrine,  of  judgment;  and 
ihese  so  influenced  in  their  choice  of  language  that 
the  words  they  used  were  the  words  of  God.  This 
is  the  doctrine  which  is  known  as  that  of  Plenary 
Verbal  Inspiration. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

OBJECTIONS   CONSIDERED. 

A  THEISM  or  Christianity  is  the  alternative 
-^  which  an  infidel  philosophy  oifers  the  world. 
The  controversy  between  Christian  and  anti-Chris- 
tian thought  must  therefore  turn  upon  the  question 
regarding  the  divine  authority  of  the  Bible.  Hence 
it  is  not  difficult  to  account  for  the  growing  skep- 
ticism throughout  Christendom  with  regard  to  the 
plenary  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures. 

There  is,  of  course,  a  very  wide  difference  between 
those  who  hold  imperfect  views  of  inspiration  and 
those  who  deny  it  altogether.  Some  take  the  ex- 
treme pantheistic  position  that  a  revelation  is  im- 
possible ;  some  resolve  inspiration  into  genius,  and 
allow  that  Isaiah  and  Paul  were  inspired  in  the 
sense  that  Homer  and  Shakespeare  were.  Some  are 
advocates  of  a  partial  inspiration,  and  are  willing 
to  concede  that  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  were  in- 
fallibly ret^orded  through  divine  agency,  while  they 
hold  that  the  writers  were  left  to  the  exercise  of 
their  ordinary  faculties  in  selecting  and  recording 

93 


94        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

the  ikcts.  Some  liave  no  difficulty  in  supposing 
that  the  thoughts  were  suggested  to  the  sacred 
writers  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  while  they  were  left 
to  the  exercise  of  their  unassisted  powers  in  cloth- 
ing them  with  words.  However  wide  the  differ- 
ences which  separate  these  classes  of  men,  they 
agree  in  denying  that  all  the  parts  of  the  Bible 
were  written  by  men  under  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  such  a  sense  that  the  words  of 
Scripture  are  the  words  of  God.  Even  men  who 
stand  high  in  theological  circles  embrace  a  theory 
of  inspiration  which  tolerates  mistakes  on  the  part 
of  the  sacred  writers.  Fairness,  therefore,  demands 
that  we  give  due  attention  to  the  difficulties  which 
are  said  to  encumber  this  doctrine. 

Before  entering  upon  a  consideration  of  the  ob- 
jections, I  would  remind  the  reader  that  the  pres- 
ent attitude  of  thought  is  alarmingly  Rationalistic. 
There  is  a  growing  disposition  to  make  human 
reason  the  standard  of  truth.  The  infallibility  of 
private  opinion  is,  with  many,  a  far  more  palatable 
doctrine  than  the  infallibility  of  the  Bible. '  Hence, 
the  readiness,  and  in  many  cases  the  delight,  with 
which  men  find  objections  to  the  doctrine  under  dis- 
cussion. It  is  a  noticeable  fact  that  in  the  doctrinal 
controversies  of  the  day,  the  so-called  rational  argu- 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  95 

ment  is  employed  by  those  who  reject  the  truth  far 
more  than  the  argument  from  Scripture.  Men  take 
the  element  of  guilt  out  of  sin,  the  element  of  satis- 
faction out  of  the  atonement,  the  element  of  justice 
out  of  God's  nature,  on  the  ground  of  certain  pre- 
conceived opinions  with  regard  to  the  relations  we 
sustain  to  God.  The  opponents  of  the  doctrines 
of  the  Church  do  not  rest  their  case  on  exegetical 
grounds,  but  the  Scripture,  when  it  is  used  at  all, 
is  employed  mainly  to  lend  the  appearance  of  sup- 
port to  a  foregone  conclusion.  The  real  argument, 
however  disguised,  is,  "  This  is  my  opinion. '^ 

Let  us  now  notice  briefly  the  main  objections 
which  have  been  urged  against  the  doctrine  of 
inspiration. 

(1.)  Revelation  said  to  be  impossible. 

The  first  class  of  objectors  are  those  who  forestall 
all  inquiry  by  the  assertions  that  a  revelation  is  im- 
possible. This  objection  has  weight  only  on  the 
supposition  that  there  is  no  God.  But  if  a  man 
adopts  a  philosophy  which  leads  to  Atheism,  the 
only  way  to  answer  his  objection  is  to  upset  his 
philosophy.  Suppose  the  question  were  asked, 
Given  the  universal  belief  of  mankind  in  the  ex- 
istence of  God,  can  we  vindicate  that  belief?  And 
this  in  my  judgment  is  really  the  fair  way  of  pre- 


96        IJSSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

sentiug  the  question  concerning  the  being  of  God. 
How  should  we  proceed  ?  We  could  not  take  a 
single  step  in  settling  this  question  unless  we  had 
correct  views  on  a  fundamental  question  in  psy- 
chology. To  establish  the  doctrine  of  Theism  it  is 
necessary  to  vindicate  the  authority  of  primary  be- 
liefs. Now,  consciousness  is  the  common  material 
out  of  which  philosophy  of  every  complexion  is 
made.  Men  differ  in  their  interpretations  of  con- 
sciousness, while  they  admit  that  her  authority  is 
unquestionable.  All  agree  that  consciousness  tes- 
tifies to  the  distinction  answering  to  the  words  sub- 
ject and  object,  ego  and  non  ego.  We  cannot  think, 
feel  or  will  without  realizing  this  distinction.  The 
question  arises.  Is  the  distinction  ultimate?  Can 
we  trust  our  intuitive  conviction?  The  battle- 
ground of  the  rival  philosophies  is  just  here.  It 
may  be  said  that  there  is  no  real  ground  for  the 
distinction  between  self  and  not  self,  but  (1)  what 
we  call  the  "not  self  is  only  the  necessary  modi- 
fication of  the  mind;  in  which  case  our  logical  land- 
ing-place is  a  system  of  idealistic  Pantheism.  Or 
(2)  that  what  we  call  "self  is  only  a  modification 
of  matter;  in  which  case  we  fall  into  unqualified 
Materialism.  I  am  stating  a  well-known  fact  in 
the  history  of  opinion  when  I  say  that  the  pan- 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  ^^7 

tlieistic  character  of  the  post-Kantian  philosophy 
of  Germany  is  attributable  to  the  denial  of  the 
fundamental  distinction  between  subject  and  object 
to  which  consciousness  testifies.  The  materialistic 
character  of  the  Positive  Philosophy,  represented  by 
such  men  as  J.  S.  Mill,  Bain,  Herbert  Spencer, 
has  its  root  in  the  same  psychological  error.  It  is 
unnecessary  for  me  to  repeat  the  arguments  by 
which  Sir  William  Hamilton  demonstrated  the 
duality  of  consciousness  as  an  ultimate  fact  in  our 
constitution.  What  I  have  said  will  be  sufficient 
to  show  how  intimately  the  philosophical  questions 
of  the  day  are  connected  with  fundamental  doc- 
trines of  the  Christian  system.  The  objection  that 
a  revelation  is  impossible  grows  out  of  a  false 
philosophy,  which,  by  denying  the  validity  of  our 
primary  beliefs,  leads  to  Atheism.  Granted  that 
there  is  a  God,  it  is  absurd  to  say  that  he  cannot 
reveal  himself. 

(2.)  The  Bible  said  to  contradict  science. 
Truth  cannot  contradict  truth.  We  cannot  re- 
sist the  conclusions  which  have  been  fairly  arrived 
at  by  scientific  men.  We  cannot  resist  the  evidence 
that  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God.  The  discrepan- 
cies, therefore,  between  Scripture  statements  and  the 
theories  of  science  prove  either  that  we  have  misin- 


98        INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

terpreted  Scripture  or  that  the  scientific  thecriea 
are  untrue.  Sometimes  it  may  be  necessary  to 
modify  our  translation  of  the  Bible  in  the  light  of 
scientific  discovery.  Science,  therefore,  ought  to  1)6, 
and  has  been,  an  exegetical  help.  Inspiration  must 
not  be  held  responsible  for  our  erroneous  interpre- 
tations. The  discoveries  of  geology  have  thrown 
light  upon  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  but  what- 
ever theory  be  adopted  for  the  purpose  of  harmo- 
nizing the  two  accounts  of  the  early  history  of  our 
planet,  the  inspiration  of  Genesis  is  unaffected. 

It  is  asking  too  much,  however,  when  we  are  re- 
quired to  accommodate  our  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture to  a  theory  which  is  still  a  matter  of  debate 
among  scientific  men.  We  cannot  give  up  the 
Scripture  account  of  the  creation  on  the  ground 
that  it  does  not  agree  with  Darwin's  theory  of  the 
origin  of  species,  for  the  simple  reason  that  on  sci- 
entific ground  Darwinianism  has  been  proved  to  be 
untrue.  The  objection  that  the  sacred  writers  are 
destitute  of  astronomical  knowledge,  and  that  their 
language  is  in  accordance  with  an  unscientific  age, 
when  men  believed  that  the  earth  was  a  flat  surface 
and  that  the  heavenly  bodies  actually  moved  as  they 
appeared  to  an  observer  on  the  earth,  is  too  obvi- 
ously foolish  to  need  refutation.     "  The  purpose  of 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  99 

Iioly  Scripture,"  says  Baroiiius,  "  is  to  teach  us  how 
to  go  to  heaven,  and  not  how  the  heavens  go."* 
The  Bible  was  not  intended  as  a  text-book  in  sci- 
ence, and  we  have  no  right  to  expect  that  it  should 
anticipate  the  discoveries  of  a  thousand  years.  It 
was  intended  for  the  ignorant  and  the  learned  alike, 
and  in  order  that  it  might  be  understood  it  was 
necessary  that  events  should  be  described  in  the 
language  of  every-day  life.  No  charge  of  scien- 
tific inaccuracy  can  damage  the  authority  of  the 
Scriptures,  when  it  is  remembered  that  the  teaching 
of  science  forms  no  part  of  the  object  for  which 
they  were  given.  And  the  accuracy  of  Scripture 
is  sufficiently  vindicated  when  it  is  shown  that  in 
describing  phenomena  in  the  language  of  every-day 
life  it  teaches  no  error.  This  has  been  done  ag-a^'n 
and  again. 

(3.)  The  Bible  said  to  contradict  itself. 
As  early  as  the  timeof  Celsus,  in  the  second  cen- 
tury, the  discrepancies  which  are  found  in  the  Bible, 
especially  in  the  evangelists,  were  made  use  of  as 
arguments  against  the  divine  authority  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  at  the  present  day  are  sources  of  anxiety 
to  many  who  cannot  be  accused  of  any  desire  to 
find  objections  to  inspiration.  The  following  are 
*  Quoted  by  Guizot,  Meditations,  1st  Ser.,  p.  187  .Am.  «d. 


100      INSPIRATION   OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

some  of  the  alleged  instances  of  contradiction  :  In 
the  accounts  of  the  cure  of  the  centurion's  servant, 
Matthew  (viii.  5-13)  states  the  centurion  came  to 
Jesus,  while  Luke  (vii.  1-10)  says  that  he  sent  first 
the  elders  of  the  Jews  and  then  his  friends.  There 
are  three  accounts  of  the  curing  of  blindness  at 
Jericho.  Matthew  (xx.  30)  mentions  that  there 
were  two  blind  men,  Mark  (x.  46)  and  Luke  (xviii. 
35)  mention  only  one.  Matthew  and  Mark  say  the 
miracle  was  performed  when  Jesus  was  going  out  of 
Jericho — Luke,  when  he  was  coming  in.  Matthew 
(viii.  28),  relating  the  incident  of  the  demoniacs  at 
Gadara,  states  that  there  were  two  men  who  met 
Jesus,  while  Mark  (v.  2)  mentions  only  one.  Simi- 
lar discrepancies  are  alleged  to  exist  in  the  accounts 
which  we  have  of  our  Lord's  infancy  and  of  his  re- 
surrection, as  well  as  of  the  inscription  on  the  cross. 
The  same  objection  is  also  raised  with  reference  to 
the  twofold  record  of  the  sermon  on  the  mount. 

How  are  we  to  meet  this  objection  ?  In  the  first 
place,  we  must  remember  that  the  inspiration  of 
the  Scriptures  has  already  been  established  by  the 
most  abundant  evidence.  That  being  the  case,  we 
are  safe  in  assuming  that  these  apparent  contra- 
dictions are  only  apparent.  Any  hypothesis  which 
will  harmonize  the  discrepancies  must  be  considered] 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  101 

a  fair  answer  to  the  objection.  This  principle  would 
be  considered  valid  in  any  other  department  of  in- 
quiry, and  its  application  here  ought  not  to  be  ob- 
jected to.  If,  for  example,  certain  phenomena  in 
nature  were  observed  which  apparently  contra- 
dicted the  law  of  gravitation,  the  scientific  student 
would  feel  that  any  hypothesis  should  be  accepted 
which  would  explain  the  contradiction,  and  if  none 
could  be  suggested,  rather  than  give  up  the  estab- 
lished doctrine  of  gravitation,  he  would  be  willing 
to  wait  until  further  discovery  should  throw  light 
upon  the  subject.  With  regard  to  most  of  the 
alleged  discrepancies  to  be  found  in  Scripture  the 
method  of  harmonizing  is  very  simple. 

One  hundred  and  forty-four  passages  are  recon- 
ciled by  the  application  of  this  simple  rule  given 
by  Mr.  Garbett  :*  "  Variations  of  statements  are 
not  contradictions  when  they  arise  either  from  record- 
ing different  parts  of  some  common  event,  or  from 
assigning  a  different  emphasis  and  importance  to  the 
same  parts  J^  Take  the  case  of  the  centurion,  above 
quoted.  Luke's  statement  does  uot  contradict 
Matthew's,  unless  we  suppose  that  each  intended 
to  tell  the  whole  story.  There  is  nothing  unnatural 
in  the  supposition  that  he  sent  first  the  elders,  and 
*  Gol's  Word  Written,  p.  267. 


102     INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

then  his  friends,  and  that  finally,  through  anxiety 
for  his  servant,  he  came  himself.  Take  the  case 
of  the  angels  at  the  sepulchre ;  Matthew  and  Mark 
mention  one,  Luke  says  there  were  two.  The 
accounts  are  not  irreconcilable.  Matthew  related 
the  appearance  of  the  angel  in  connection  with  the 
rolling  away  of  the  stone.  It  was  enough  for  his 
purpose  to  mention  one.  Mark  mentions  the  angel 
who  addressed  the  women.  His  silence  with  re- 
gard to  the  presence  of  another  does  not  contradict 
Luke's  account.  We  cannot  bring  the  charge  of 
contradiction  against  the  evangelists  in  these  and 
similar  instances,  unless  we  adopt  the  rule  that 
truthfulness  in  the  report  of  the  same  occurrence 
by  different  persons  is  inconsistent  with  circum- 
stantial variations. 

Mr.  Garbett  gives  another  very  important  rule : 
^^  Separate  transactions  are  not  to  be  identified  with 
each  other  because  of  a  parallelism  between  some  cir- 
cumstances of  an  event  or  some  portions  of  a  dis- 
course." 

When  Mark  states  that  Jesus  cured  a  blind  man 
when  he  went  out  of  Jericho,  he  clearly  contradicts 
Luke,  who  relates  that  the  cure  was  performed 
when  he  was  going  into  Z evicho-  "pro^nded  the  two 
accounts  refer  to  the  same  event.     But   the  discrep- 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  103 

ancy  is  easily  removed  by  the  supposition  that  the 
evangelists  relate  two  distinct  miracles.     If  there 
remain    passages  which   we   cannot   reconcile,  we 
must  conclude  that  the  discrepancies  arise  out  of 
the  absence   of  the   historical  links  which  would 
show  their  connections.     It  would  be  unfair,  after 
all  the  evidence  we  have  for  the  inspiration  of  the 
Scriptures,  to  charge  the  same  writers  with  glaring 
contradictions,  because  from  our  defective  informa- 
tion we  are  unable  to  harmonize  their  statements. 
Says  Dr.  Lee :  "  It  has  been  reserved  for  modern 
times  to  suggest  a  solution  which  has  been  almost 
universally   accepted,   and    which   removes   every 
shade  of  difficulty  from  the  case.     Mark  asserts 
that  our  Lord  was  crucified  '  at  the  third  hour,'  or 
at  nine  o'clock  in  the  forenoon ;  while  according  to 
John,  Pilate  about  the  sixth  hour  was  still  sitting 
in  judgment.     The  explanation  of  this  apparent 
discordance  in  time— an   explanation  which  even 
Strauss,  while  exaggerating  Uhe  difficulty'  to  the 
utmost,  allows  to  be  ^  possible'— is,  that  John  has 
given  the  hour  according  to  the  Roman  calcula- 
tion of  time,  which  counted  as  we  do  from  mid- 
night; while  Mark  adheres  to  the  JeAvish  custom 
of  counting  from  sunrise."     Closer  study  of  the 
Scrii)tures,   and    increased  knowledge  of   subjects 


104     INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

cognate  to  these  inquiries,  we  may  well  hope,  will 
clear  up  many  difficulties  which  now  serve  to  try 
our  faith. 

(4.)   Unimportant  passages. 

Some  men  shrink  from  the  doctrine  of  plenary 
inspiration  lest  they  should  be  compelled  to  be- 
lieve that  Paul  sent  his  salutations  to  Tryphena 
and  Tryphosa,  and  gave  special  instructions  con- 
cerning the  cloak  which  he  left  at  Troas,  while 
writing  under  the  influence  of  the  Spirit.  I  have 
not  space  to  dwell  upon  the  importance  of  these 
so-called  insignificant  details.  If  I  could  show,  as 
Gaussen  has  beautifully  shown,*  how  vividly  in 
these  passages  the  apostle  is  presented  to  us  in  the 
circumstances  of  his  daily  life;  if  I  could  show 
that  these  passages  complained  of  are  the  modest 
witnesses  to  the  self-sacrifice  of  Paul ;  if  I  could 
show  that  they  are  expressions  of  the  tenderness 
of  his  nature,  of  his  affectionate  regard  for  those 
who  have  ministered  to  him ;  if  I  could  show  that 
these  passages  contain  vivid  pictures  of  the  rela- 
tions sustained  by  the  members  of  the  primitive 
Church  to  each  other;  if  I  could  show  that  these 
salutations,  said  to  be  unworthy  of  inspiration,  are 
DUgges^ive  of  the  lesson  that  Christianity  ought  to 
■^  Gaiissen  on  Inspiration,  p.  186,  American  edition. 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  105 

manifest  itself  in  Christian  courtesy  and  a  delicate 
considenition  of  the  wants  of  others, — then  I  think 
the  objection  that  these  so-called  insignificant  pas- 
sages are  unworthy  of  a  place  in  a  volume  of  in- 
spired writings  would  fall  to  the  ground. 
(5.)   Objections  based  on  1  Cor.  chapter  vii. 
In  the  sixth  verse  of  this  chapter  Paul  says, 
"I   speak  this  by  permission,   not  of   command- 
ment."    It  is  argued  that  the  apostle  here  clearly 
distinguishes  the  w^ords  which  he  spoke  by  divine 
authority  from  those  which  he  uttered  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  his  owni  judgment.     The  difficulty  is  en- 
tirely removed  by  a  more  correct  translation.     He 
is  teaching  not  that  there  are  some  things  which 
he  is  permitted  to  say,  and  some  which  he  speaks 
by  commandment,  but    that  his    recommendation 
was  not  given  in  the  way  of  positive  command,  but 
of  allowance:   "I  say  this  by  way  of  allowance 
for  you,  not  by  way  of  command.'^ 

Again,  in  verse  10,  he  says,  "Unto  the  married 
I  command,  yet  not  I,  but  the  Lord;"  verse  12: 
"  But  to  the  rest  speak  I,  not  the  Lord ;"  verse  25  : 
"  Now- ,  concerning  virgins,  I  have  no  commandment 
of  the  Lord,  yet  I  give  my  judgment." 

"  By  which  language,"  says  Lee,*  "  he  is  supposed 
*  Inspiration,  p.  272. 


106      INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

to  in  ji mate  that  this  certain  point  of  Scripture  the 
author  may  write  according  to  his  own  uninspired 
human  judgment,  although  guided  in  other  por- 
tions of  his  work  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  Such  an 
inference,  however,  is  altogether  at  variance  with 
Paul's  design,  whose  words  in  this  case  can  only 
be  distorted  into  an  argument  against  inspiration 
by  utterly  overlooking  his  object  and  meaning. 
The  first  of  the  three  expressions  which  have  been 
quoted,  ^  I  command,  yet  not  I,  but  the  Lord,'  ob- 
viously refers  to  the  institution  by  Christ  (as  Mark 
has  recorded  the  circumstances)  of  the  original  law 
of  marriage,  and  relates  to  an  ordinance  revealed 
from  the  very  first  and  obligatory  on  every  occa- 
sion and  in  every  age;  while,  by  the  two  latter 
passages — on  which  the  argument  against  inspira- 
tion rests — Paul,  as  the  context  clearly  proves, 
merely  intends  to  convey  that  Christ  had  directly 
provided  for  those  particular  cases  in  which  his 
apostle  now  pronounces  his  inspired  and  author- 
itative opinion." 

I  have  noticed  the  main  objections  to  the  doc- 
trine of  plenary  inspiration.  There  are  others 
which  arise  out  of  a  misunderstanding  of  the  doc- 
trine, and  some  of  th^se  will  be  considered  in  the 
next  chapter. 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  107 

It  is  but  fair  that  we  should  now  ask  thcee  who 
maintain  a  theory  of  partial  inspiration  what  proof 
they  have  to  oifer  in  support  of  it  ?  Our  conclu- 
sions, if  they  have  been  fairly  reached,  throw  upon 
those  who  difter  with  us  the  burden  of  proving 
their  position.  We  find  nothing  in  the  Bible  to 
favour  a  theory  which  labels  one  part  of  it  as  God's 
work  and  another  as  man's.  We  have  a  right, 
therefore,  to  say  to  him  who  holds  such  an  opinion, 
"  Your  theory  presupposes  that  you  are  able  to  put 
your  finger  on  certain  passages  of  Scripture  and 
say.  These  are  divine,  and  on  certain  other  passages 
and  say,  These  are  human.  Only  by  your  ability 
to  discriminate  between  what  is  man's  and  what  is 
God's  in  the  Bible  can  you  save  your  theory  from 
the  charge  of  begging  the  question.  And  if  you  pro- 
fess to  be  able  to  make  this  discrimination,  then 
we  ask  you  to  tell  us  the  standard  by  which  you 
are  governed."  In  reply  to  this  challenge  we  should 
doubtless  be  referred  to  a  so-called  "  verifying  fac- 
ultij:'  Says  the  author  of  ''  Liber  Librorum,''  "  We 
now  approach  that  portion  of  our  task  which  de- 
mands of  us  ^  a  principle,'  by  the  help  of  which  we 
may,  without  weakening  our  faith  in  Scripture  as 
a  whole,  separate  its  parts  and  distinguish  between 
that  which  is  divine  and   that   which    ii>   human. 


108      INSFIBATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

We  call  this  the  ^  verifying  faculty/  and  regard  it 
as  being  neither  more  nor  less  than  *  r^eason  enlight- 
emd  and  sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost'  "*  "  Reason/^ 
as  Bishop  Butler  says,  who  is  quoted  by  this  author 
in  the  sentence  following  the  above,  "  is  the  only 
faculty  we  have  wherewith  to  judge  concerning  any- 
thing, even  revelation  itself."  But  there  is  a  proper 
and  an  improper  use  of  reason  in  matters  of  religion. 
When  reason  is  exercised  within  her  proper  sphere, 
she  has  not  a  syllable  to  say  against  plenary  inspi- 
ration. It  is  only  when  she  has  given  her  judg- 
ment in  questions  over  which  she  has  no  jurisdic- 
tion, that  objections  have  been  raised  against  the 
doctrine. 

Contradictions  cannot  be  true,  and  inspiration 
could  not  make  them  credible.  If  the  Bible  is  a 
bundle  of  contradictions,  we  may  safely  say  that  it 
did  not  come  from  a  God  of  truth.  But  reason  is 
going  outside  of  her  province  when  she  brings  the 
charge  of  contradiction  against  discrepant  state- 
ments, simply  because  the  means  of  reconciling 
them  are  not  at  hand.  Again,  the  distinction  be- 
tween right  and  wrong  is  a  moral  intuit i(m.  God 
cannot  do  wrong.  But  it  is  clear  that  many  things 
are  right  for  God  to  do  which  would  be  wrong  for 
*  Page  77. 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  109 

men  to  do.  It  is  wrong  for  a  man  to  slay  his 
neighbour,  but  who  will  dispute  God's  right  to  dis- 
pose of  his  creatures  as  he  pleases  ?  I  do  not  affirm 
that  justice  means  anything  different  with  God  from 
what  it  is  with  man.  Whatever  philosophy  may 
say  on  the  analogy  between  the  human  and  the 
divine  attributes,  the  believer  in  Scripture  must 
consider  the  question  settled,  for  "  God  made  man 
in  his  own  image."  But  the  rights  and  obligations 
recognized  among  men  grow  out  of  the  relations 
which  men  sustain  to  one  another.  To  affirm  that 
right  and  wrong  between  man  and  God  are  in  all 
cases  the  same  as  right  and  wrong  between  man 
and  man,  is  to  affirm  that  the  relations  which  sub- 
sist between  man  and  his  Maker  are  in  all  cases 
similar  to  those  which  subsist  between  man  and  his 
neighbour.  The  objections  which  are  made  to  the 
doctrine  of  inspiration,  on  the  score  that  certain 
passages  in  the  Old  Testament  and  certain  doctrines 
in  the  New  are  incompatible  with  the  character  of 
God,  are  based  on  an  attempt  to  narrow  God  to  the 
limits  of  human  relationship  and  bind  him  by  the 
laws  which  govern  human  society. 

There  are  certain  intuitive  truths  which  underlie 
every  process  of  reasoning  and  are  the  basis  of  all 
religious  faith.     Let  us  take  the  t\^^o  which  we 


110     INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

have  already  mentioned  as  illustrations — the  law 
of  contradiction  in  logic  and  the  distinction  between 
right  and  wrong  in  ethics.  If  we  cannot  rely  upon 
the  validity  of  these  primary  beliefs,  we  cannot 
pursue  any  argument  or  receive  any  revelation. 
Clearly,  then,  it  is  the  province  of  reason  to  decide 
whether  the  Bible  as  a  whole,  or  in  any  of  its  parts, 
contradicts  any  of  our  primary  beliefs;  and  if  it 
does,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  Bible,  or  a  part  of  it, 
does  not  come  from  God.  But  we  are  not  aware 
of  any  intuitive  belief  by  which  we  can  determine 
what  is  proper  and  what  is  not  proper  for  God  to 
do  on  every  occasion  ;  what  passages  in  the  Bible 
have  sufficient  dignity  to  be  assigned  to  divine  au- 
thorship and  what  have  not;  what  occasions  are 
important  enough  for  the  manifestation  of  God's 
miraculous  power  and  what  are  not.  And  men 
have  pushed  the  exercise  of  their  blind,  erring  intel- 
lect to  an  unwarranted  extent  when  they  have  under- 
taken to  say  what  God  ought  or  ought  not  to  do, 
and  what  his  word  ought  or  ought  not  to  contain. 
When  it  is  said  that  certain  passages  are  too 
unimportant  to  be  considered  as  inspired,  it  is  fair 
to  ask  the  objector  if  he  can  tell  us  what  is  the 
mimmwm  of  importance  an  inspired  passage  sAiould 
possess.     We  confess  to  a  lack  in  our  mental  con- 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  HI 

stitution  which  incapacitates  us  from  drawing  a 
nice  boundary  line  between  the  human  and  the 
divine,  and  prevents  us  from  setting  limits  to  the 
divine  propriety.  So  with  objections  drawn  from 
the  styk  in  which  the  books  are  written.  The 
book  of  Job  and  the  prophecies  of  Isaiah  differ 
in  style  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  and  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  but  have  we  a  right  to  say 
that  one  style  is  God's  and  the  other  man's  ?  What 
do  we  know  of  God's  style  f  This  is  not  the  place 
for  me  to  speak  of  the  individuality  of  the  writers. 
I  shall  do  so  in  the  next  chapter.  In  the  mean 
time,  it  is  sufficient  to  protest  against  the  criticism 
which  resolves  inspiration  into  a  question  of 
aesthetics. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

EXPLICATION    OF    THE    DOCTRINE   OF    INSPIRATION. 

IN  recent  discussions  on  the  subject  of  inspira 
tion,  prominence  has  been  given  to  some  questions 
which  as  yet  have  not  been  alluded  to  in  these 
pages.  A  consideration  of  them  will  be  necessary 
for  the  purpose  of  defining  with  greater  strictness 
the  doctrine  of  inspiration,  and  of  answering  ob- 
jections which  arise  out  of  a  misapprehension  of  it. 

(1.)  When  it  is  claimed  that  the  Scriptures  are  in- 
spired j  it  must  be  understood  that  we  refer  to  the 
original  manuscripts. 

This  remark  is  necessary  in  view  of  the  objec- 
tions which  are  based  on  the  various  readings  of 
MSS.  and  on  differences  in  translations.  The  books 
of  the  Bible  as  they  came  from  the  hands  of  their 
writers  were  infallible.  The  autographs  were 
penned  under  divine  guidance.  It  is  not  claimed 
that  a  perpetual  miracle  has  preserved  the  sacred 
text  from  tlie  enors  of  copyists.  The  inspired 
character  of  our  Bible  depends,  of  course,  upon  its 

112 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       113 

correspondence  with  the  original  inspired  manu- 
scripts. These  autographs  are  not  in  existence,  and 
we  must  determine  the  correct  text  of  Scripture  in 
the  same  way  that  we  determine  the  text  of  any 
of  the  ancient  ch\ssics. 

We  are  not  in  possession  of  an  autograph  copy 
of  the  "  ^neid"  or  the  "  Ars  Poetica/'  yet  no  one 
refuses  to  receive  our  editions  of  these  poems  as 
the  genuine  productions  of  Virgil  and  Horace. 
There  is  therefore  no  force  in  the  objection  against 
inspiration  we  are  now  considering,  for  just  so  far 
as  our  present  Scripture  text  corresponds  with  the 
original  documents  is  it  inspired  ;  and  so  far  as 
any  translation  is  a  faithful  rendering  of  the  orig- 
inal does  it  possess  the  authority  of  an  inspired 
document.  Have  we  a  correct  text?  If  we  have 
not,  then  just  in  proportion  to  its  incorrectness  are 
we  without  the  word  of  God.  Are  the  various 
readings  of  sufficient  importance  to  shake  our  faith 
in  the  genuineness  of  our  Scripture  text  ?  Let  us 
take  the  testimony  of  those  who  have  investigated 
the  subject.  Says  Professor  Moses  Stuart:  "Out 
of  some  eight  hundred  thousand  various  readings 
of  the  Bible  that  have  been  collected,  about  seven 
hundred  and  ninety-five  thousand  are  of  about  as 
much  importance  to  the  sense  of  the  Greek  and 


114     INSPIRATION  OF  THE   SCRIPTURES. 

Hebrew  Scriptures  as  the  question  in  English 
orthography  is,  whether  the  word  honour  shall  be 
spelled  with  a  w  or  without  it.  Of  the  remainder, 
some  change  the  sense  of  particular  passages  or 
expressions,  or  omit  particular  words  or  phrases ; 
but  no  one  doctrine  of  religion  is  changed,  not  one 
precept  is  taken  away,  not  one  important  fact  is 
altered,  by  the  whole  of  the  various  readings  col- 
lectively taken."  Says  Garbett:  "  Let  every  word 
affected  by  these  variations  be  put  on  one  side,  not 
as  certainly  uninspired,  but  as  not  being  certainly 
inspired,  because  it  is  not  certainly  identical  witi) 
the  original  autographs.  It  will  be  quite  enough 
if  the  verbal  inspiration  of  all  the  rest  be  admitted. 
For  this  inspired  portion,  on  which  variation  of 
reading  has  not  thrown  the  shadow  of  a  question, 
contains  so  entirely  every  expressive  and  emphatic 
word  that  the  denial  of  inspiration  to  the  remain- 
der becomes  simply  nugatory,  if  it  be  not  ridic- 
ulous." * 

It  may  be  said,  "  This  admission  materially 
weakens  the  argument.  If  you  do  not  claim  that 
the  MSS.  have  been  miraculously  preserved  from 
error  in  the  transmission  of  them,  why  are  you  so 
totrenuous  in  favour  of  a  verbal  insoiration? 
*  God's  Word  Written,  p.  342. 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.        \\h 

What  do  you  gain?^'  We  gain  all  the  difference 
there  is  between  an  inspired  and  an  uninspired 
original.  This  difference  is  apparent.  According 
to  our  view,  an  infallible  autograph  has  been  per- 
petuated by  the  industry  of  transcribers,  and  has 
been  changed  only  in  some  unimportant  details 
through  the  mistakes  of  copyists.  According  to 
the  other  view,  similar  changes  have  been  incor- 
porated in  a  ({ocwmGwt  faulty  at  the  outset.  On  the 
one  supposition,  Paul  wrote  his  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans under  divine  guidance,  so  that  the  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith  is  God's  own  commentary 
on  the  sacrifice  of  Christ ;  on  the  other,  the  epistle 
contains  only  the  expression  of  Paul's  individual 
opinion,  or  is  at  best  a  human  version  of  a  divine 
revelation,  and  came  from  Paul's  hands  with  the 
defects  of  a  purely  human  authorship. 

(2.)  Inspiration  is  not  claimed  for  the  writers  of 
Scripture  in  a  sphere  outside  of  their  official  work. 

The  infallible  communication  of  God's  message, 
whether  oral  or  written,  was  the  design  of  inspira- 
tion. In  the  discharge  of  their  official  duties  the 
apostles  and  prophets  acted  under  the  unerring 
guidance  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  No  objection  against 
inspiration  can  be  drawn  from  the  fallibility  which 
the  writers   of    Scripture  exhibit  in    private  life. 


116      INSPIRATION   OF  THE  SCRIPTUllES. 

Because  God  made  the  writers  of  Scripture  infalli- 
ble as  the  official  communicators  of  his  will,  it  does 
not  follow  that  he  made  them  perfect  as  men.  We 
have  reason  to  suppose  that  the  Christian  experi- 
ence of  the  apostles  was  analogous  to  that  of  Chris- 
tians in  our  day.  Paul  spoke  with  confidence  con- 
cerning his  preaching,  but  with  great  humility 
concerning  his  personal  attainments  in  holiness. 
The  Psalms  of  David  are  the  inspired  liturgy  of 
the  Church,  but  David  had  no  inspiration  to  keep 
him  from  sin.  Paul  was  inspired  to  write  his 
epistles,  but  the  gift  of  infallibility  did  not  extend 
to  a  knowledge  of  what  should  befall  him  at  Jeru- 
salem. So  we  read  that  Peter  "dissembled"  at 
Antioeh,  and  that  there  was  a  "sharp  contention" 
between  Paul  and  Barnabas.  But  these  sins  and 
failings  with  which  the  apostles  were  chargeable  as 
private  Christians  should  not  be  brought  up  as  ob- 
jections to  their  inspiration  when  they  were  acting 
in  their  official  capacity.  It  is  urged  that  this  view 
of  the  inspiration  under  which  the  sacred  writers 
acted  breaks  up  the  unity  of  their  lives  by  dividing 
them  into  inspired  and  uninspired  portions- .  There 
\s  no  force,  however,  in  the  objection  if  there  is 
evidence  for  the  fact.  There  is  conclusive  evidence 
that  inspiration  does  not  extend  to  all  the  actions 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       117 

of  those  who  are  the  subjects  of  it,  in  that  God  has 
on  more  than  one  occasion  made  bad  men  the  in- 
fallible communicators  of  his  will.  Balaam  had  no 
inspiration  to  keep  him  from  sin,  and  yet,  wicked 
as  he  was,  God  made  him  infallible  in  the  utterance 
of  his  prophecy.  The  fair  inference  from  the  teach- 
ing of  Scripture  is,  that  in  their  private  life  the  sa- 
cred writers  were  under  the  ordinary  influence  of  the 
Spirit  of  grace,  and  that  they  became  the  subjects 
of  a  specific  influence  the  moment  they  opened 
their  mouths  to  preach  or  took  up  their  pens  to 
write.  So  that  their  words,  while  in  one  sense  their 
own,  were  also  unequivocally  God's. 

(3.)  The  specific  agency  of  the  Holy  Ghost  in  ren- 
dering the  sacred  writers  infallible  in  the  communica- 
tion of  truth  must  not  be  confounded  with  his  sancti- 
fying influence  on  the  hearts  of  all  Ch-istians. 

This  mistake  is  commonly  though  inexcusably 
made,  and  arises  from  the  fact  that  two  specifically 
different  operations  of  the  Spirit  are  often  called  by 
the  same  name.  Thus,  in  the  communion  service 
of  the  Church  of  England  the  prayer  occurs,  "that 
the  thoughts  of  our  hearts  may  be  cleansed  by  the 
inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  that  we  may  per- 
fectly love  God  and  worthily  magnify  his  name." 
Mr.  Maurice,  after  quoting  this,  adds :  *'  Here  are 


118     INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

petitions  which  concern  not  a  few  specially  religious 
men  or  some  illuminated  teachers,  but  all  the  mis- 
cellaneous people  who  are  gathered  together  in  a 
particular  congregation.  Are  we  paltering  with 
words  in  a  double  sense?  When  we  speak  of  in- 
spiration, do  we  mean  inspiration  ?  When  we  refer 
to  the  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures  in  our  sermons, 
ought  we  to  say,  ^  Brethren,  we  beseech  you  not  to 
suppose  that  this  inspiration  at  all  resembles  that 
for  which  you  have  been  praying.  They  are  ge- 
nerically,  essentially  unlike?'" 

Mr.  Maurice  has  written  a  very  able  history  of 
philosophy,  and  is  one  of  the  leading  thinkers  in 
England  to-day.  He  must  have  known  that  it  is 
no  uncommon  thing  for  the  same  name  to  be  used 
in  a  different  sense.  He  must  be  familiar  with 
what  logicians  call  the  fallacia  equivocationis.  Dr. 
Arnold  fell  into  the  same  mistake.  He  says  :  "  It 
is  no  less  an  unwarrantable  interpretation  of  the 
word  inspiration  to  suppose  that  it  is  equivalent  to 
a  communication  of  the  divine  perfections.  Surely, 
many  of  our  words  and  many  of  our  actions  are 
spoken  and  done  by  the  inspiration  of  God's  Spirit, 
without  whom  we  can  do  nothing  acceptable  to 
God.  Yet  does  the  Holy  Ghost  so  inspire  us  as  to 
communicate  to  us  his  own  perfections  ?     Are  our 


EXPLICATION  OF    THE  DOCIUINE.        119 

best  words  or  works  free  from  sin  ?  All  inspira- 
tion does  not  then  destroy  the  human  and  fallible 
part  in  the  nature  which  it  inspires.  It  does  not 
change  men  into  God/'  * 

Mr.  Maurice  says,  in  his  Essay  on  Inspiration, 
^^  I  shall  fix  my  thoughts  on  the  word  inspiration; 
our  disputes  are  emphatically  about  the  word." 
The  fallacy  which  underlies  the  writer's  discussion 
of  this  subject  is  wrapped  up  in  the  sentence  we 
have  quoted.  The  controversy  does  not  turn  on 
the  meaning  of  a  word.  The  question  is,  whether 
the  Bible  is  God's  book  or  man's ;  whether  the  sa- 
cred writers  were  infallibly  secured  against  error, 
or  whether  their  writings  are  chargeable  with  the 
defects  of  merely  human  authorship.  If  the  doc- 
trine of  an  infallible  rule  of  faith  is  proved,  it 
makes  little  difference  whether  we  call  it  inspira- 
tion or  not.  It  is  clear  that  the  etymology  of  the 
word  cannot  settle  the  doctrine,  but  that  the  word 
must  be  defined  by  the  doctrine  which  it  is  used  to 
indicate.  To  illustrate:  Human  experience  and 
the  Bible  teach  that  the  sanctifying  agency  of  the 
Spirit  does  not  make  man  morally  perfect.  If,  as 
in  the  Church  of  England  Prayer-book,  inspiration 
is  the  word  used  to  express  the  sanctifying  influ- 
*  Quoted  by  Lee,  p.  217. 


120     INSPIRATION  OF     VHE  SCRIPTURES. 

ence  of  the  Spirit,  then  inspiration  in  this  sense  miisl 
be  compatible  with  moral  imperfections.  Again, 
there  is  abundant  evidence  that  the  sacred  writers, 
in  the  composition  of  Scripture,  were  made  infalli- 
ble by  the  special  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  To 
express  this  agency  we  use  the  word  inspiration, 
and  used  in  this  sense  inspiration  is  certainly  in- 
compatible with  error.  It  is  just  as  idle  to  argue 
that  the  inspiration  of  the  sacred  writers  did  not 
render  them  infallible  in  the  discharge  of  their  offi- 
cial duties  because  the  inspiration  of  private  Chris- 
tians does  not  make  them  perfect,  as  it  would  be  to 
argue  on  the  other  side  that  every  Christian  under 
the  inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  morally  per- 
fect because  infallibility  is  claimed  on  behalf  of  the 
writers  of  Scripture.  How  men  of  learning  can  be 
deceived  by  the  ambiguous  use  of  a  word  it  is  hard 
to  imagine. 

(4.)  Inspirationy  though  verbal,  is  not  mechanical. 

It  has  been  already  shown  that  inspiration  ex- 
tends to  the  words  of  Scripture.  When  we  say 
that  the  Scriptures  are  verbally  inspired,  we  mean 
nothing  more  than  that  the  writers  were  influenced 
in  their  choice  of  words  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  We 
do  not  pretend  to  say  hoiv  this  influence  was  ex- 
erted.    We  certainly  do  not  mean  to  say  that  the 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.        121 

words  were  dictated^  or  that  tlie  writers  consciously 
acted  as  amanuenses.  And  yet  there  are  those  who 
seem  to  identify  verbal  inspiration  with  what  is 
known  as  the  mechanical  theory.  Thus  Dr.  Ban- 
nerman,  in  his  very  able  work,  says,  *'  The  theory 
of  verbal  inspiration,  or  the  theory  that  human 
language  was  the  medium  through  which  the  Holy 
Ghost  both  revealed  truth  to  the  prophet  and  em- 
powered him  to  record  it  with  infallible  accuracy, 
is  one  that  probably  is  not  open  to  the  objection 
of  being  inconsistent  with  the  exercise  of  the  facul- 
ties of  the  writers  according  to  their  ordinary  laws. 
....  Still,  it  is  a  theory.  ....  The  connection 
between  human  thought  and  human  language  is 
not  of  that  invariable  kind  to  justify  us  in  saying 
that  there  can  be  no  access  to  the  mind  except 
through  words,  and  no  channel  by  w^hich  it  can  be 
guided  to  an  infallible  expression  of  them  except 
a  verbal  inspiration."  Using  the  expression,  ver- 
bal inspiration,  as  Dr.  Bannerman  does,  I  fully 
concur  with  what  he  says.  We  certainly  have  no 
evidence  that  words  are  the  only  channel  of  com- 
munication between  the  Infinite  and  the  finite  mind. 
This  is  another  instance  in  which  the  meaning  of 
the  word  must  be  defined  by  the  doctrine  which  it 
is  employed  to  indicate.     The  writers  of  Scripture 


122      INSPIRATION  OF  THE   SCRIPTURES. 

communicated  God^s  message  infallibly  in  words. 
The  expression  verbal  inspiration  implies  that  the 
inspiration  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  extended  to 
the  words  of  Scripture.  It  does  not  mean  that 
words  were  the  channel  through  which  the  Spirit 
gained  access  to  the  minds  of  the  sacred  writers. 
It  does  not  imply  that  the  sacred  writers  were 
machines,  or  that  they  were  the  mere  transcribers 
of  words,  which  were  successively  whispered  in 
their  ears.  The  theory  of  verbal  inspiration  does 
not  refer  to  the  process  by  which  the  matter  of 
Scripture  was  communicated  to  the  writers,  but 
to  the  result  of  the  Spirit's  influence  as  seen  in  an 
J  infallible  writing.  How  the  words  of  Scripture 
originated  in  the  minds  of  tlie  writers  we  do  not 
know,  but  that  they  are  God's  words  we  do  know, 
and  therefore  we  say  that  the  Bible  is  verbally 
inspired. 

(5.)  There  is  a  differ^ence  hetweeti  revelation  and 
inspiration. 

The  reality  of  this  distinction  is  not  questioned, 
but  the  difficulty  in  fixing  a  boundary  line  between 
revelation  and  inspiration  has  given  rise  to  a  con- 
troversy between  the  ablest  defenders  of  the  infal- 
libility of  the  Scriptures.  A  revelation  is  a  super- 
natural communication   of  truth   on   the  part  of 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCVRINE.       123 

God.  This  definition  is  accurate  enough  for  our 
present  purpose :  we  shall  have  occasion  after  a 
little  to  employ  one  that  is  more  discriminating. 
Now,  the  Bible,  particularly  the  Old  Testament, 
is  full  of  recorded  revelations  which  God  from 
time  to  time  made  to  his  servants.  The  possession 
of  a  revelation,  however,  did  not  qualify  a  man  for 
being  the  infallible  instructor  of  others.  He  was 
liable  to  make  mistakes  and  incorporate  human 
errors  in  God's  message.  Hence,  when  God  de- 
signed his  communications  to  serve  a  public  pur- 
pose, he  not  only  gave  revelations  to  his  servants, 
but  he  rendered  them  infallible  in  communicating 
them  through  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Inspiration  was  the  influence  under  which  the 
sacred  writers  became  infallible  in  the  communi- 
cation of  truth  to  their  fellow-men.  This  definition, 
however,  though  true,  is  not  complete,  and  is  liable 
to  the  objection  that  it  only  provides  against  the 
possibility  of  error  on  the  part  of  the  sacred  writ- 
ers, but  does  not  give  the  character  of  divine 
authorship  to  their  writings.  It  would  be  better 
to  say  that  we  understand  ih^  inspiration  under 
which  the  Scriptures  were  written  to  mean  that 
intimate  relation  between  the  Holy  Spirit  an  i  the 
minds  of  the  sacred  writers  in  virtue  of  which  we 


124      jySFIRATIoy   OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

are  justified  in  saying  that  the  words  of  Scripture 
are  the  words  of  God.  It  is  clear,  then,  that  reve- 
lation does  not  iruply  inspiration.  Joseph  was 
warned  of  God  in  a  dream.  He  received  a 
j  revelation,  but  was  not  inspired.  But  does  inspir- 
I  ation  imply  revelation  ?  This  has  been  a  subject 
of  discussion  of  late,  particularly  between  Dr.  Lee 
and  Dr.  Bannerman. 

It  is  evident  that  in  this  controversy  two  very 
different  questions  have  been  confounded,  to  wit : 
(1.)  The  character  in  which  the  Bible  addresses  usj 
as  the  result  of  the  labours  of  the  sacred  writers; 
and  (2.)  the  manner  in  which  the  writers  them- 
selves derived  the  information  which  is  recorded 
in  the  pages  of  Scripture.  The  first  is  evidently 
in  Dr.  Bannerman's  mind  when  he  says : 

"  It  is  somewhat  startling  to  be  told,  not  by  the 
opponents,  but  by  the  friends  of  inspiration,  that 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  other  such  historical 
portions  of  the  Bible,  are  no  part  of  the  revelation 
of  God." 

Again :  "  Had  the  prophets,  or  the  evangelists, 
or  the  apostles  the  supernatural  commission  and 
gift  of  God  to  write  in  his  name?  This  is  the 
question  which,  if  answered  in  the  affirmative,  gives 
to  all  they  wrote  the  character  of  revelation." 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRIXE.       125 

Again  :  "  If  all  the  books,  and  all  the  parts  of 
each" book,  unoorrupted  and    unmutilated,  which 
are  usually  accounted  to  belong  to  the  canon,  have 
a  riglit  to  their  place  there,  it  is  impossible,  with- 
out playing  fast  aiid  loose  with  the  evidence  that 
accredits  all  alike,  to  deny  to  one  portion  the  cha- 
racter of  revelation  while  assigning  it  to  the  re- 
mainder."    These  remarks  would  have  been  just 
if  as  Dr.  Bannerman  seems  to  have  supposed.  Dr. 
Lee  had  cast  discredit  upon  the  historical  portions 
of  the  Scripture  by  denying  their  divine  author- 
ship.    He  has  been  led  into  this  line  of  reasoning 
br  a  misapprehension  of  the  real  question  at  issue. 
If  the  question  be  put,  Is  the  Bible  a  revelation 
to   us    from   God?   we   answer,   "  Yes-in  all   «te 
parts,"    since    the    words   of   Scripture    are    the 
words  of  God.     But  if  we  are  asked  whether  all 
the  contents  of  the  Bible  are  the  records  of  super- 
natural communications   objectively  presented  to 
the  minds  of  the  writers,  it  will  not  be  so  easy  to 
give  an  affirmative  answer. 

Let  it  be  understood,  then,  that  we  are  not  now 
discussing  the  question  whether  the  Bible  comes  to 
us  in  the  character  of  a  revelation  from  God.  That 
is  settled.  The  question  is,  whether  there  is  such 
a  differ,  ice  in  the  way  the  sacred  writers  came  into 


126     INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

possession  of  the  knowledge  which  they  have  em- 
bodied in  the  Scripture  that  we  are  justified  in  say- 
ing that  in  some  cases  they  received  their  informa- 
tion by  direct  revelation  from  God,  while  in  other 
cases  they  derived  it  from  ordinary  sources.  In 
reply  to  this  question,  Dr.  Lee  answers  yes ;  Dr. 
Bannerraan,  no. 

It  is  of  the  first  importance  to  determine,  if  pos- 
sible, the  exact  meaning  of  a  revelation.  In  all  the 
revelations  recorded  in  Scripture  their  objective 
character  is  unmistakable.  A  palpable  distinction 
is  preserved  between  the  revealer,  the  thing  re- 
vealed and  the  person  receiving  the  revelation. 
Noah  was  warned  of  the  deluge.  The  revelation 
took  the  most  definite  shape :  "  God  said  unto 
Noah,  The  end  of  all  flesh  is  come  before  me;  for 
the  earth  is  filled  with  violence  through  them  :  and 
behold,  I  will  destroy  them  with  the  earth.  Make 
thee  an  ark  of  gopher  wood :  rooms  shalt  thou 
make  in  the  ark/'  etc.  Gen.  vi.  13.  God  talked 
with  Abram  when  he  gave  him  the  covenant  of 
promise:  "After  these  things  the  word  of  the  Lord 
came  unto  Abram  in  a  vision,  saying,  Feai  not, 
Abram,  I  am  thy  shield  and  thy  exceeding  great 
reward.  And  he  brought  him  forth  abroad  and 
said,  Look  i  3w  toward  heaven  and  tell  the  stars,  if 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       127 

thou  be  able  to  number  thera ;  and  he  said  unto 
him,  So  shall  thy  seed  be."  The  same  distinctness 
characterizes  the  revelation  which  Daniel  records  in 
the  ninth  chapter  of  his  prophecy  :  "  Yea,  while  I 
was  speaking  in  prayer,  even  the  man  Gabriel, 
whom  I  had  seen  in  the  vision  at  the  beginning, 
being  caused  to  fly  swiftly,  touched  me  about  the 
time  of  the  evening  oblation.  And  he  informed  me 
and  talked  with  me,  and  said,  O  Daniel,  I  am  now 
come  forth  to  give  thee  skill  and  understanding. 
....  Know,  therefore,  that  from  the  going  forth 
of  the  commandment  to  restore  and  build  Jerusa- 
lem unto  the  Messiah  the  Prince  shall  be  seven 
weeks  and  threescore  and  two  weeks ;  the  street 
shall  be  built  again  and  the  wall,  even  in  troublous 
times."  In  the  accounts  which  we  have  of  the 
revelations  given  to  Paul  on  his  way  to  Damascus, 
and  to  Peter  on-  the  housetop  at  Joppa,  the  same 
sharp  discrimination  between  the  giver  and  the 
receiver  of  the  communication  is  preserved.  See 
Acts  ix.;  X.  Turn  finally  to  the  account  of  the 
revelation  given  to  John :  ^^  The  revelation  of  Jesu,? 
Christ,  which  God  gave  unto  him  to  show  to  his 
servants  things  that  must  shortly  come  to  pass,  and 
be  sent  and  signified  by  his  angel  unto  his  servant 
John I  was  in  the  spirit  on  the  Lord's  day, 


128      INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES. 

aud  heard  behind  me  a  great  voice  as  a  trumpet. 
....  And  when  I  saw  him  I  fell  at  his  feet  as 
dead,  and  he  laid  his  right  hand  upon  me^  saying, 
Fear  not,"  e  c.  Kev.  i.  etc. 

The  accounts  we  have  cited  are  sufficient  to  afford 
material  for  an  accurate  definition  of  a  revelation. 
In  the  Scripture  sense  of  the  term,  a  revelation 
V  means  something  more  than  tliat  a  conception  has 
originated  in  the  mind  through  divine  agency;  for 
not  only  in  the  cases  cited  was  the  matter  of  reve- 
lation a  communication  from  God,  but  it  was  known 
to  be  so.  The  distinction  between  God  communi- 
cating and  the  person  receiving  was  as  much  a 
matter  of  consciousness  as  is  the  distinction  between 
the  object  seen  and  the  person  seeing  in  an  act  of 
vision.  If  every  thought  which  entered  the  mind 
of  the  sacred  writers  through  divine  influence  is  a 
revelation  in  the  strict  and  proper  sense  of  the 
word,  there  need  be  no  hesitation  in  saying  that 
everything  in  the  Bible  was  communicated  to  the 
writers  by  special  revelation.  For  whether  they 
wrote  history  or  doctrine — whether  they  searched 
records  or  made  drafts  on  memory ;  whether  they 
made  statements  with  the  preface,  ^'  Thus  saith  the 
Lord,''  or  wrote  what  was  a  matter  of  general 
knowledge — in  every  case  their  conceptions  were 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       12S 

shaped,  their  words  chosen,  their  selections  made 
under  the  infallible  guidance  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

But  a  revelation,  as  I  have  already  said,  means 
more  than  that  a  conception  has  originated  in  the 
mind  through  divine  agency.  It  implies  that  truth 
has  been  objectively  presented  to  the  mind  by  dream, 
vision  or  audible  voice,  and  that  its  7^eception  has 
been  attended  with  the  consciousness  that  it  came  from 
God.  Take,  for  example,  the  vision  of  Paul  (Acts 
xvi.  9)  which  influenced  him  to  go  to  Macedonia. 
How  did  he  know  that  it  was  not  a  mere  subjective 
state?  And  why  did  he  feel  ])ound  to  obey  it? 
Simply  because  consciousness  testified  as  clearly 
as  to  his  own  identity  that  he  had  been  in  direct 
communication  with  God. 

Now  the  question  is.  Have  we  evidence  that 
everything  whatever  the  sacred  writers  penned 
was  a  revelation  ^Vi  the  sense  defined?  Do  we  know, 
for  example,  that  Paul  could  say,  "These  facts, 
these  doctrines,  this  line  of  argument,  this  meta- 
phor, these  words  which  I  have  embodied  in  my 
epistle,  were  presented  to  my  mind  by  direct  com- 
munication from  God,  so  that,  in  recording  them, 
I  am  acting  as  his  amanuensis,  am  reporting  what 
God  has  said  to  me,  am  fixing  on  paper  what  God 
has  made  to  pass  before  my  mind^^?     I  do  not  ask 


130     INSPIRATION  OF  THE   SCRIPTURES. 

whether  the  apostles  wrote  under  divbie  influence — 
this  question  has  been  already  answered — or  whether 
they  knew  that  they  were  inspired;  but  have  we  evi- 
dence that  they  could  always  discriminate  between 
the  Holy  Ghost  as  the  communicator  of  truth 
and  themselves  as  the  recipients  of  it?  Could  they 
so  objectify  their  conceptions  as  to  be  able  to  say, 
"  These  are  revelations  made  to  us  by  God  "  ?  If 
any  such  evidence  exist,  I  am  ignorant  of  it,  and 
therefore,  using  the  word  revelation  in  this  restricted 
sense,  I  cannot  take  the  position  with  Dr.  Banner- 
man,  that  revelation  is  co-extensive  with  inspira- 
tion. That  this  statement  may  not  be  understood 
as  casting  the  slightest  discredit  upon  the  divine 
authorship  and  infallibility  of  the  smallest  portion 
of  the  Scriptures,  let  me  ask  the  reader  to  remem- 
ber the  two  senses  in  which  the  word  revelation  is 
used.  Taking  it  in  its  wider  sense,  to  express  the 
idea  that  the  Bible  is  a  message  to  man  from  God 
for  the  guidance  of  life,  we  may  say,  with  confidence 
every  part  of  it  is  a  revelation.  Taking  it  in  its 
narrower  sense,  to  ex})ress  the  objective  communi- 
cation of  truth  by  God  to  the  sacred  writers,  we 
can  only  say  that  there  is  no  evidence  to  warrant 
the  assertion  that  everything  incorporated  in  i\iQ 
Bible  was  first  presented  to  the  minds  of  the  writers 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.        131 

by  means  of  revelations.  Still,  it  is  true  that  God 
may  have  presented  the  most  familiar  facts  to  the 
minds  of  the  Scripture  writers  in  a  series  of  distinct 
revelations.  We  may  think  it  unlikely  that  he 
would  do  so,  but,  for  aught  we  know,  he  may  have 
done  so.  Everything  recorded  in  the  Acts  may  have 
been  revealed  to  liuke  as  distinctly,  as  objectively, 
as  the  vision  which  Peter  saw  when  on  the  house- 
top in  Joppa.  Scripture  furnishes  no  material  for 
a  positive  answer  to  the  question  under  discussion. 
We  cannot  affirm  with  Dr.  Banner  man  that  revela- 
tion is  co-extensive  with  inspiration.  And  on  the 
other  hand,  we  cannot,  with  Dr.  Lee,  be  confident 
that  it  is  not. 

'^  But,"  says  Dr.  Banner  man, "  without  revelation 
in  addition  to  inspiration,  the  utmost  that  can  be 
said  is,  that  the  narrative  is  an  infallible  transcript 
or  copy  of  the  beliefs  and  knowledge  of  the  writers, 
leaving  it  still  an  open  question  as  to  whether  their 
beliefs  and  knowledge  were  true."  Again  :  "  The 
conception  in  the  mind  of  the  sacred  penman,  both 
of  facts  and  truths,  although  recorded  with  infalli- 
ble accuracy  as  Gonceivedj  may  yet  not  answer  to  the 
reality." 

If  the  office  of  inspiration  is  simply  to  enable 
the  subjects  of  it  to  fix  on  paper  their  own  concep- 


132      INSPIRATION   OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

tions  witli  infallible  accuracy,  these  remarks  are 
just.  It  would  be  rather  a  useless  inspiration,  and 
one  not  worthy,  we  may  say  with  reverence,  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  which  consisted  only  in  stereotyping 
human  errors  and  imperfections. 

These  remarks,  however,  are  enough  to  show  us 
at  once  the  real  ])oint  of  difference  between  the  two 
writers  whose  names  have  been  so  frequently  men- 
tioned. Dr.  Bannerman  limits  inspiration  to  the 
infallible  expression  of  thoughts,  either  orally  or 
on  paper.  The  originating  of  them  in  the  minds 
of  men  is,  in  his  view,  the  office  of  revelation. 
He  narrows  the  sphere  of  inspiration,  and  is  there- 
fore led  to  widen  the  scope  of  revelation.  Accord- 
ing to  the  view  which  I  have  taken  in  these  pages, 
the  shaping  of  the  conception  in  the  mind  of  the 
sacred  writer  and  its  infallible  communication  in 
words  are  included  under  the  idea  of  inspiration. 
According  to  Dr.  Bannertjian,  the  latter  is  the 
exclusive  function  of  inspiration. 

(6.)  There  is  a  human  and  a  divine  element  in  the 
Scriptures. 

These  adjectives  are  not  used  to  distinguish  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  Bible.  Nothing  is  implied  in 
them  disparaging  to  its  plenary  inspiration  It  is 
throughout  a  divine  and  a  human  book,      [n  the 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       133 

strictest  sense  of  the  term,  God  is  its  author.  And 
yet  this  is  not  equivalent  to  saying  that  God 
adopts  every  sentiment  found  in  its  pages. 

The  Bible  is  not  written  throughout  in  the  form 
of  a  direct  address  from  God  to  men.     Portions 
are  so  written,  and  portions  embody  the  sentiments 
of    men,   and    sometimes   of    very   wicked    men. 
Plenary  inspiration  does  not  involve  the  idea  that 
God  is  responsible  for  these  sentiments.     It  is  a 
guarantee  that  they  have  been  correctly  rendered, 
but  not  that  they  have  the  divine  sanction.     His- 
torians are  not  supposed  to  be  in  sympathy  with 
all    the  wickedness   they  chronicle;   and   because 
God  enabled  his  servants  to  transcribe  with  infalli- 
ble  accuracy  the  wicked    and  even  blasphemous 
speeches  of  men,  it  does  not  follow  that  he  endorses 
sin.     Notice,  too,  the  difference  between  the  senti- 
ments of  inspired  men,  and  an  inspired  account  of 
the  sentiments  of  men  uninspired.     Paul's  judg- 
ment in  reference  to  the  (luestion  addressed  to  him 
by  the  Corinthians  was  infallible,  because  it  was  an 
uispired  judgment.     Job's  friends,  on  the  contrary, 
were  not  inspired,  and  though  the  writer  of  the 
book  has  given  us  an  inspired  account  of  what  they 
Haid,  their  speeches  do  not  on  that  account  carry 
with  them  the  divine  approval.     Coleridge  there- 


134      INSPIRATION  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

fore  clearly  misapprehended  the  nature  of  ins])ira- 
tion  when  he  objected  to  the  inspired  character  of 
the  book  of  Job,  because  sentiments  are  therein 
expressed  which  are  incompatible  with  the  moral 
nature  of  God. 

Again  :  the  Bible  is  a  human  book.  That  is  to 
say,  it  was  written  by  men  in  human  language. 
The  sacred  writers  were  not  machines — were  not 
mere  amanuenses.  Inspiration  did  not  abridge 
their  freedom  or  destroy  their  individuality.  They 
vvere,  in  every  sense  of  the  word,  authors.  Differ- 
ences of  education,  of  character,  of  surrounding 
circumstances  on  the  part  of  the  several  writers, 
give  colouring  to  their  books.  "  Where  the  pro- 
pliet  has  been  of  the  sacerdotal  race,  the  various 
features  of  the  theocracy — the  temple  and  the  al- 
tar, the  ark  and  the  cherubim — float  before  his 
view,  as  in  the  w^ritings  of  Jeremiah  and  Ezekiel. 
The  shepherd  Amos  still  wanders  in  the  pastures 
— his  imagination  still  lingers  with  the  flocks, 
and  dwells  on  the  culture  of  his  fields — his  simil- 
itudes are  taken  from  the  mildew  which  blights 
the  vineyard  or  the  lion  w^hich  invades  the 
fold."  * 

There  is  no  difficulty  in  conceiving  that  the 
^  Lee  on  Inspirati'in,  y.   173. 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       135 

writers  of  Scripture  reasoned,  exercised  memory, 
availed  themselves  even  of  existing  documents, 
were  free  in  the  use  of  their  faculties,  while  at  the 
same  time  they  were  infallibly  guided  in  the  words 
they  used  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Let  it  be  granted  that  inspiration  did  not  de- 
stroy individuality,  let  it  be  admitted  the  sacred 
writers  were  truly  the  authors  of  the  books  they 
wrote,  and  we  shall  have  no  difficulty  in  account- 
ing for  variations  in  the  accounts  of  the  same 
event.  Dean  Alford  finds  an  objection  to  the 
plenary  inspiration  of  the  Gospels  in  the  different 
accounts  of  the  inscription  on  the  cross.  Is  it 
likely  that  four  men  relating  the  same  event  would 
use  precisely  the  same  language,  or,  reporting  what 
had  been  said  in  their  hearing,  would  do  so  with- 
out the  omission,  addition  or  change  of  a  word  ? 
If  in  a  court  of  justice  four  witnesses  should  give 
their  testimony  in  precisely  the  same  language, 
would  the  fact  not  aflPord  a  strong  evidence  of 
collusion.  And  is  not  diversity  of  statement  within 
certain  limits  rather  corroborative  of  truth  than 
otherwise  ? 

By  placing  the  several  statements  of  the  evan- 
gelists side  by  side,  we  shall  find  that  they  are  not 
contradictory,  but    that   they  differ    only  as   they 


136      INSPIRATION^  OF  THE  SCRIPTURES. 

omit  one  or  more  of  the  words  coDstituting  the 
inscription.     Thus : 

The  King  of  the  Jews.— Mark. 

This  is  the  King  of  the  Jews. — Luke. 

This  is  Jesiis,  the  King  of  the  Jews. — Matthew. 

Jesus  of  Nazareth,  the  King  of  the  Jews. — John. 

It  was  possible  for  the  Spirit  so  to  have  influ- 
enced the  evangelists  that  they  should  have  reported 
this  inscription  verbatim.  It  was  possible  for  the 
biographers  of  Christ,  guided  by  inspiration,  not  to 
have  varied  a  hair's  breadth  in  their  statements. 
But  there  are  reasons  which  make  it  important  that 
the  individuality  of  the  sacred  writers  should  be 
preserved. 

Suppose  the  whole  Bible  were  in  the  form  of  a 
communication  made  by  God  to  one  man,  and 
written  by  him  with  the  preface,  "  Thus  saith  the 
Lord,'^  how  could  we  prove  that  its  claims  were 
valid  ?  We  should  want  the  evidence  of  prophecy 
and  its  recorded  fulfilment;  we  should  miss  the 
argument  from  the  unity  of  design  which  we  now 
have  in  a  series  of  documents  written  by  men  who 
lived  ages  apart;  we  should  be  without  the  con- 
firmatory testimony  of  One  who  wrought  miracles 
in  attestation  of  his  divine  commission.  In  short, 
we  should   he  without  the   evidences  which  go  to 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       137 

prov<i  the  divine  authority  of  the  Scriptures.  The 
form  whicli  the  Bible  now  possesses,  it  will  not  be 
rash  to  say,  is  essential.  It  is,  among  other  rea- 
sons, because  it  comes  to  us  as  a  series  of  tracts 
written  by  different  men,  yet  pervaded  by  an  un- 
mistakable unity ;  it  is  because  these  tracts  are  so 
corroborative  of  each  other  that  we  are  irresistibly 
led  to  a  recognition  of  their  historical  value  and 
divine  authority.  As  has  already  been  remarked, 
the  Bible  comes  into  the  hands  of  the  student  as  a 
series  of  literary  documents.  It  must  be  judged  as 
a  human  book.  It  cannot  escape  critical  handling. 
It  must  be  able  to  stand  the  ordeal  of  historical 
criticism  before  it  can  receive  the  homage  of  men 
as  a  divine  revelation.  Did  Christ  rise  from  the 
dead?  We  wish  testimony  to  that  effect — the  in- 
dependent testimony  of  those  who  saw  him  after 
his  triumph  over  the  grave — of  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke  and  John. 

Now  it  undoubtedly  strengthens  our  faith  in  the 
evangelists — judging  them  as  ordinary  historians — ■ 
to  find  in  their  pages  essential  agreement  with  cir- 
cumstantial variety.  In  an  evidential  point  of  view 
it  was  a  matter  of  great  importance  that  the  indi- 
viduality of  the  writers  of  Scripture  should  be  pre- 
served, in  Older  that  the  Bible  might  carry  with  it 


138     INSPIRATION  OF   THE  SCRIPTURES, 

the  unvarnished  testimony  of  independent  witnesses 
to  the  cardinal  facts  of  the  gospel.  How  much  cor- 
roborative evidence  concerning  the  life  of  Christ 
would  be  wanting  if  the  four  Gospels  had  been  cast 
in  one  mould  ? 

The  Bible  was  written  by  men,  and  all  that  is 
ordinarily  implied  in  human  authorship  (save  falli- 
bility) may  be  fairly  ascribed  to  the  sacred  writers. 
The  Bible  was  penned  under  the  direct  influence 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  that  infallibility  attaches  to 
every  word. 

These  two  statements,  placed  side  by  side,  consti- 
tute the  sum  of  our  knowledge  concerning  the  com- 
position of  the  Scriptures.  We  need  not  attempt 
to  make  a  theory  to  explain  how  the  human  and 
the  divine  unite  in  the  composition  of  the  Scrip- 
tures. We  do  not  know  how  the  human  and  the 
divine  unite  in  the  person  of  Christ;  we  can  only 
state  the  fact  that  Christ  is  "  God  and  man  in  two 
distinct  natures,  and  one  person  for  ever."  We  do 
not  know  how  the  human  and  the  divine  unite  in 
the  pro(;ess  of  sanctification.  We  know  that  a  union 
of  some  kind  is  implied  in  Paul's  address  to  the 
Philippians,  "  Work  out  your  own  salvation  with 
fear  and  trembling :  for  it  is  God  which  worketh  in 
you  bcth  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure." 


EXPLICATION  OF  THE  DOCTRINE.       139 
The  conclusion  we  reach  on  the  subject  which 
has  been  discussed  in  these  pages  is  admirably  ex- 
pressed in  the  words  of  two  recent  writers.     Says 
Westcott:*  "We  have  a  Bible  competent  to  calm 
our  doubts  and  speak  to  our  weakness.     It  is  au- 
thoritative, for  it  is  the  voice  of  God ;  it  is  intelli- 
gible, for  it  is  in  the  language  of  men."     Says  Gar- 
bett:t  "While  the  words  of  Scripture  are  truly 
and  characteristically  the  words  of  men,  they  are 
at  the  same  time  fully  and  concurrently  the  words 
of  God." 

*  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Uie  Gospels,  p.  33. 
t  God's  Word  Written,  p.  293. 


THE   END. 


The  inspiration  of  the  Scriptures. 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 

~        llllllllllll 


1    1012  00052  3318 


